Cova & Cova 2002

European Journal of Marketing
Tribal marketing: The tribalisation of society and its impact on the conduct of marketing
Bernard Cova, Véronique Cova,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Bernard Cova, Véronique Cova, (2002) "Tribal marketing: The tribalisation of society and its impact
on the conduct of marketing", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 36 Issue: 5/6, pp.595-620, https://
doi.org/10.1108/03090560210423023
Downloaded by National University of Ireland Galway At 05:49 16 September 2018 (PT)
Permanent link to this document:

https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560210423023
Downloaded on: 16 September 2018, At: 05:49 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 55 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 28672 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2008),"Fandom affiliation and tribal behaviour: a sports marketing application", Qualitative
Market Research: An International Journal, Vol. 11 Iss 1 pp. 17-39 <a href="https://
doi.org/10.1108/13522750810845531">https://doi.org/10.1108/13522750810845531</a>
(2007),"Surf tribal behaviour: a sports marketing application", Marketing Intelligence &
Planning, Vol. 25 Iss 7 pp. 668-690 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/02634500710834160">https://
doi.org/10.1108/02634500710834160</a>
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:327868 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The research register for this journal is available at The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregisters http://www.emeraldinsight.com/0309-0566.htm
Tribal marketing The tribalisation

of society
The tribalisation of society and
its impact on the conduct of
marketing 595
Bernard Cova
ESCP-EAP, European School of Management,
Paris-Oxford-Berlin-Madrid, and
VeÂronique Cova
University of Toulon-Var, France
Keywords Society, Postmodernism, Behavioural sciences, Consumer behaviour, Marketing
Abstract This paper presents an alternative, ``Latin'' vision of our societies. Here the urgent
societal issue is not to celebrate freedom from social constraints, but to re-establish communal
embeddedness. The citizen of 2002 is less interested in the objects of consumption than in the
social links and identities that come with them. This Latin view holds that people like to gather
together in tribes and that such social, proximate communities are more affective and influential
on people's behaviour than either marketing institutions or other ``formal'' cultural authorities.
There is also an element of resistance and re-appropriation in the acts of being, gathering and
experiencing together. This view of the shared experience of tribes sets it apart from both
Northern notions of segmented markets and one-to-one relationships. In this Latin view, the
effective marketing of 2002 and beyond is not to accept and exploit consumers in their
contemporary individualisation, as Northern approaches might. Rather the future of marketing is
in offering and supporting a renewed sense of community. Marketing becomes tribal marketing.
In a marketing profession challenged by the Internet phenomenon, tribal marketing is by no
means just another passing fad but a Trojan horse to induce companies to take on board the re-
emergence of the quest for community.
Introduction: a Latin view

The Latin School of Societing[1], that represents the focal point for this
paper, provides a basis for a retrospection of the role of marketing in 2002
and beyond (see Appendix 1). The central leitmotif of societing ± the link is
more important than the thing ± leads researchers ``to analyse economic
activity not as an independent activity but as one embedded in a societal
context, which, at the same time, encompasses it and renders it possible''
(Cova, 1999, p. 80).
Consequently, this Latin view makes salient a number of societal issues
overlooked or neglected in Northern approaches of marketing (Cooper and
McLoughlin, 1998). The Northern school of thought sees consumption as self-
defining, whereas the Latin School espouses the view that products and
services are consumed as much for their linking as for their use value. In this
paper, we will develop one of the aspects of the Latin approach, namely
European Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 36 No. 5/6, 2002, pp. 595-620.
The authors wish to thank Kenneth Cassler for his helpful comments on an earlier draft of this # MCB UP Limited, 0309-0566
paper. DOI 10.1108/03090560210423023
European tribalism and tribal marketing. The aim is not to replace a Northern by a Latin
Journal of marketing but to engage with more than one perspective; to have a repertoire of
Marketing more than one way of interpreting reality; to stir marketing imagination from
its apparent lethargy (Brownlie et al., 1999). The aim is also to mobilise
36,5/6 marketing researchers and practitioners around what we think is right (Sherry,
2000; Sikka, 1999): re-socialising people more than liberating them! Thus, the
596 urgent societal issue is not to celebrate freedom from social constraints, but to
re-establish communal embeddedness: a kind of emancipation from the projects
of emancipation (Firat and Dholakia, 1998). The path we follow ``to catalyse
moral insurgency beyond the school-yard'' (Sherry, 2000, p. 333) is to offer
tribal marketing as an appealing alternative to the dominant discourse in

marketing.
In this paper we will first discuss the sociological foundations of such an
approach, then present a case study on the in-line roller[2] tribe in order to
investigate possible ways for marketers to support ± and capitalise on ± the
link between members of a tribe.
Tribalism: the strangeness of postmodern social dynamics

Our era is often characterised in Northern countries by individualism (Firat and
Venkatesh, 1993; Firat and Shultz, 1997), the logical conclusion of the modern
quest for liberation from social bonds. The right to liberty ± unbounded in
theory but until now limited to the economic, political and intellectual field ±
affects all aspects of daily life. Gaining ground is the idea of a social condition
in which individuals, freed from the constraints of collective ideals in matters of
education, the family, sex, are operating a process of personalisation as a way
of managing behaviour. They do this not through the tyranny of details, but
with as few constraints and as many choices as possible. It has been said that
we have now entered the era of the ordinary individual, that is to say an age in
which any individual can ± and must ± take personal action, so as to produce
and show one's own existence, one's own difference (Elliott, 1997, 1999).
The fragmentation of society, fostered by the developments of industry and
commerce, is among the most visible consequences of this individualism.
Products and services have progressively freed people from the many alienating
tasks left behind by tradition, even shopping itself. From one's own home, and
without physical social interaction, one can obtain almost everything one
desires. All the technology increases isolation, while permitting one to be in
virtual touch with the whole world via fax, TV, telephone, Internet. The process
of narcissism, induced by the development and widespread use of computers in
all aspects of human existence, seems to characterise our daily life.
Our era can therefore be understood as a period of severe social dissolution
and extreme individualism. But attempts at social re-composition are also
visible: people who have finally managed to liberate themselves from social
constraints are embarking on a reverse movement to recompose their social
universe. This results in an active quest for alternative social arrangements
and new communities (Goulding et al., 2001). People are increasingly gathering
together in multiple and ephemeral groups, and such social, proximate The tribalisation
groupings have more influence on their behaviour than either modern of society
institutions or other formal cultural authorities. Our era, then, does not crown
the triumph of individualism but rather may herald the beginning of its end.
We can speak of the emergence of a reverse movement: a search for
maintaining or (re)-creating the social link (Maffesoli, 1996a). In fact, it is
sometimes claimed that the social dynamics, characteristic of our postmodern 597
era, are made up of a multitude of experiences, representations and emotions
that very often are not properly understood. Although most of the time such
dynamics are explained by individualism, we can readily observe the emerging
of ``tribalism'' (Bauman, 1990; Maffesoli, 1996a).

Why is it relevant to use the tribal metaphor in order to describe these social
dynamics? If we accept with Maffesoli (2000, p. 13) that ``postmodernity is
synergy between archaism and technological development'', we should
recognise the movement of ``re-rooting'' of the individuals that comes with their
continuous `ùprooting'' caused by progress. What they seek through the
experience of shared emotion may be considered a return of the pre-modern
imagination which has been rejected by modern thinking. This pre-modern
imagination values notions contrary to progress, such as community, locality,
nostalgia . . . The word ``tribe'' refers to this re-emergence of quasi-archaic
values: a local sense of identification, religiosity, syncretism, group narcissism
and so on. It is borrowed from anthropology, which used it in order to
characterise archaic societies, where social order was maintained without the
existence of a central power. The notion has been used largely in politics to
describe any collective behaviour, in these archaic societies, that resists the
construction of modern state institutions. Finally, the word ``tribe'' conveys the
same characteristics as the notion of `èthnic group'' but on a smaller scale: local,
linguistic and cultural homogeneity. In the same vein, it conveys the same
characteristics as the notion of ``clan'' but on a larger scale: kinship, lineage and
other blood-related attributes.
Postmodern social dynamics can metaphorically be defined as ``tribes''
because, much like the tribes of the archaic societies:
. they cannot rely on central power to maintain social order or coerce their
constituency into submission to collective rules (seldom do they have
clearly codified rules to which submission could be demanded);
. they constitute a collective actor that represents a counterpower to
institutional power;
. they do rally people not around something rational and modern ± a
project, a professional occupation, the notion of progress, but around non
rational and archaic elements ± locality, kinship, emotion, passion; and
. they are close to clans and other ethnic-flavoured groupings in the sense
that they participate in the re-enchantment of the world (Maffesoli,
1996a).
European These tribes do not limit themselves to teenage groupings, as shown by the
Journal of number of adult tribes where people gather around shared `òrdinary passions''
Marketing (Bromberger, 1998). In fact, the common denominator of postmodern tribes is
36,5/6 the community of emotion or passion. So, why not call them ``communities''?
Bounds (1997) looks at the variety of uses of the concept of community in the
598 USA. For her,
. . . community serves a metaphor for those bonds among individuals that the market is
eroding and is a reaction to globalisation . . . They are reactions to a sense of uprootedness
which is countered by seeking/roots connections through forms of associations which
preserve particular memories of the past, a measure of stability in the present and particular
expectations for the future (Bounds, 1997, pp. 2-3).
This is particularly in tune with postmodern social dynamics, but the concept
of ``community'' as used in the English language suffers from an excessive
modernist bent, since it characterises a body of people with something in
common (e.g. the district of residence, the occupational interest) without
implying the existence of non-rational and rather archaic bonds. This is
completely different in Latin countries, where the word communauteÂ in French
or communitaÁ in Italian conveys the existence of blood-related bonds.
Furthermore, with the development of the Internet, it would appear that the
concept of ``community'' is now conjoined with that of `ìnterest''. The latter has
little to do with archaic values, which is why we do not use the concept of
``community'' to define postmodern social dynamics, even if they can be
described as ``temporary or momentary communities'' (Firat and Dholakia,
1998, p. 155).
Postmodern tribes are inherently unstable, small-scale, `àffectual''
(Maffesoli, 1996a) and not fixed by any of the established parameters of modern
society. Instead, they can be held together essentially through shared emotion
and passion. They exhibit such strong ties not despite the fact that they are
temporary, but precisely because they are temporary (Kozinets). Tribes exist in
no other form but the symbolically and ritually manifested commitment of their
members. They cannot count on the high frequency of neighbourly bonds or
the intensity of reciprocal exchange. Tribes are constantly in flux, brought ever
again into being by the repetitive symbolic ritual of the members but persisting
no longer than the power of attraction of these rituals and of their cult-objects.
In fact, the (re)construction or (re)possession of meanings through shared
experiences and their enactment through rituals is the most potent form of
maintaining tribal identity in our postmodern societies.
Take the Lomo tribe as an example (Appendix 2). The whole tribal
phenomenon around Lomo is an ephemeral joint construction of the reality: a
shared feeling about what is going on around the tribe supported by numerous
rituals and the collective (re)construction or (re)possession of meanings.
Because the newly appropriated sign given to the Soviet camera is common
only to the tribe, its apparent secrecy lends added identity to the Lomo tribe.
So, postmodern tribes present some clear differences from archaic tribes The tribalisation
(such as Indian tribes in the USA): of society
. They are ephemeral and non-totalizing groupings. Archaic tribes were
permanent and totalizing.
. A person can belong to several postmodern tribes. In an archaic tribe a
person could only belong to one tribe. 599
. The boundaries of a postmodern tribe are conceptual. They were
physical in the archaic tribes.
. The members of a postmodern tribe are related by shared feelings and
(re)appropriated signs. Members of archaic tribes were related by

kinship and dialect.
Indeed, for postmodern people, the fact of belonging to a tribe does not exclude
the possibility of living a ``normal'' life: `ìnstead of constantly remaining within
their singularly preferred countercultural domain, they participate in
mainstream life, behave and dress differently and work in mainstream jobs,
they participate as students, staff or faculty in educational institutions. They
also occasionally cross over and participate in other counter-cultural-scapes''
(Firat and Dholakia, 1998, p. 144). Here, it is interesting to note that Firat and
Dholakia (1998) prefer to use other terms to describe these social alternatives:
``life-mode communities'' (p. 156) or ``life-mode-cultures'' (p. 158). They position
these social alternatives as `ènclaves'' (p. 160) outside the society. This is not
the Latin way of seeing things. Tribes are more than a residual category of
social life. They are the central feature and key social fact of our own
experience of everyday living ± even though, and maybe because, they are
difficult to catch. Therefore they can exist, often unnoticed, side by side with
modern society in a complex and intertwined fashion.
In a Latin approach (Club de Marseille, 1994; Maffesoli, 1996a), society
resembles a network of societal micro-groups, in which individuals share
strong emotional links, a common subculture, a vision of life. In our times, these
micro-groups develop their own complexes of meanings and symbols and form
more or less stable tribes, which are invisible to the categories of sociology.
Each individual belongs to several tribes, in each of which he might play a
different role and wear a specific mask; this means that the rational tools of
sociological analysis cannot classify him. And belonging to these tribes has
become, for that individual, more important than belonging to a social class or
segment. The social status, that is to say the static position of an individual in
one of the social classes, is progressively replaced by the societal configuration,
that is to say the dynamic and flexible positioning of the individual within and
between his tribes.
On this Latin analysis of society we can build a view of marketing as a
vector of the tribal link (Cova, 1997a, 1999; ReÂmy, 2001). In other words, we can
hypothesise that consumers value the goods and services, which, through their
linking value, permit and support social interaction of the tribal type, products
European or services that support AB and not the fact of being A or B. Ephemeral tribes
Journal of which need to consolidate and affirm their union are, in fact, on the look-out for
Marketing anything that can facilitate and support the communion: a site, an emblem, the
support of a ritual of integration, or of recognition (Thompson and Holt, 1996).
36,5/6 Thus, to satisfy their desire for communities, consumers seek products and
services less for their use than for their linking value (Godbout and CailleÂ, 1992;
600 Godbout, 2000). Consequently, we see marketing as the activity of designing
and launching of products and services destined to facilitate the co-presence
and the communal gathering of individuals in the time of the tribes: a kind of
``tribal marketing''. The credo of this so-called tribal marketing is that today
consumers are looking not only for products and services which enable them to
be freer, but also for products, services, employees and physical surroundings
which can link them to others, to a tribe.
Tribal consumption: worth a second look

The Latin view of marketing proposes to put into play such notions as that of
``tribes'' and ``linking value'' in order to bring into focus blurred or fuzzy
groupings of people in today's societies. In this way, it participates in the
interpretive trend in consumer research (Sherry, 1991), which focuses on the
consumer experience to interpret it with as many approaches as there are
possible related theories. One of the relevant approaches to consumption today
is the ethnosociological approach (Dibie, 1998), which offers a useful counter to
the dominant psychosocial approach (Moscovici, 1998), that of the vast
majority of marketers. Where psychosociology focuses on the influence of A on
B (A being a person or a group), or on the power of A on B, or on the
contamination of B by A or on the imitation of A by B, ethnosociology will
focus on what makes the glue between A and B, or the shared emotion between
A and B, or the being-together AB. Ethnosociology will focus on the tribe as an
actor capable of collective or group action (Bagozzi, 2000), such as industrial
districts or inter-firms networks in business-to-business markets (Brito and
Araujo, 1993). Thus, the Latin approach to marketing is more distinguishable
from other forms of marketing by its more holistic and less individualistic way
of looking at consumption than by its territory. In this way, it is not without
link with ethnoconsumerism (Meamber and Venkatesh, 2000; Venkatesh, 1995),
which studies consumption from the point of view of the social group or
cultural group that is the subject of the study. The meanings of tribal symbols
do not exist in isolation, but are constructed within the tribal culture,
negotiated and interpreted by individuals in that specific subculture. The
meaning ascribed to products and services is related to collective experiences
that constitute opportunities to affirm, evoke, assign, or revise these meanings.
Consequently, the objective is to pin down elements of an intangible nature,
which are imperceptible taken one by one but can be discerned in collective
experiences taking place in a subcultural context.
The Latin view looks at consumption from a micro-social perspective
(Figure 1). This micro-social level is one of interaction between people, whether
The tribalisation
of society
601
Figure 1.
Levels of observation of
consumption
face-to-face or in large gatherings. It is the forgotten level in consumer research

(Bagozzi, 2000), which has been mainly devoted to the individual and macro-
social levels of analysis; ``Consequently both group and non-problem-solving
behaviours have been neglected'' (Sherry, 1995, p. 12). This is the ``societal''
level as named by Maffesoli (1996a), that is to say the level of the primary
sociality (Godbout and CailleÂ, 1992), which is made up of everyday interactions
and daily emotions and differs from the secondary sociality that deals with
more official belongings and participation such as occupational. At this micro-
social level, to consume is, above all, to create social links, to build a societal
frame (Desjeux, 1996).
This micro-social perspective of consumption has been posited by
Ostergaard and Jantzen (2000) as ``consumption studies'' as opposed to ``buyer
behaviour'', ``consumer behaviour'' and ``consumer research''. In this
perspective, ``the consuming individual should be conceived as a tribe member''
(Ostergaard and Jantzen, 2000, p. 18) and not only as an `ànimal'' (buyer
behaviour), a ``computer'' (consumer behaviour) or a ``tourist'' (consumer
research). The consuming individual as a tribe member `èxists beyond the
emotional and narcissistic project described in the consumer research category.
The tribe members still have some of the tourist's emotional aspects, but the
individual is no longer viewed as an independent self who is trying to collect
ever more experiences. Instead of being based on personal emotions, the
consuming individual is a member of a tribe, where the product symbolism
creates a universe for the tribe (Ostergaard and Jantzen, 2000, p. 18).
The Latin approach makes an epistemological choice to look at consumption
at the micro-social level ``particularly as found in groups of consumers and
manifested through group action'' (Bagozzi, 2000, p. 388). This does not mean
European that other levels are useless. It only means that the Latin approach is focusing
Journal of on something relatively neglected in Northern approaches.
Marketing
Tribal marketing versus transactional and relational marketing
36,5/6 So, the Latin approach of tribal marketing has virtually rejected such concepts
as consumer segments, market niches and life styles, i.e. the very macro-social
602 constructs that underpin Northern marketing management. Nor do Latin
marketers attach too much importance to coherent consumer groupings,
because their belief is that such groupings are based on imagined, implausible
consumer profiles. The unit of reference used in tribal marketing is more a
micro-social cohort of individuals who share similar experiences and emotions,

and bond together in loosely interconnected communities, e.g. tribes. Examples
include: Lomo enthusiasts (Appendix 2), Magic the Gathering players (the card
game), sky-divers (Celsi et al., 1993) . . .
In consumer terms, the notion of tribes is not particularly revolutionary. It
can be said that they have always existed under various names (e.g. even the
Mods, Teddy Boys or Skinheads of the 1960s and 1970s can be called tribes)
but the difference is that, nowadays, `ìndividuals can belong to more than one
neo-tribe whereas with earlier youth subcultures it would have been
impossible'' (Shankar and Elliott, 1999). Indeed, former groupings were more
stable and more constraining than today's. The major difference lies in the dual
identity of postmodern tribal groupings; they are simultaneously primary and
secondary group structures. As in the primary groups, members are bonded by
shared and concrete experiences of everyday life. But these tribes do not
withdraw into themselves, because, similarly to secondary groups, the very
condition of their existence is to interact with other collective actors, to
influence the public domain through the valorisation of the shared emotion of
its members.
Of course, tribal groupings are not directly comparable with reference
groups or psychographic segments. On the one hand, they differ from reference
groups in that they do not focus on the normative influences of the group or of
individual group members on one another. Instead tribes concentrate on the
bonding or linking element that keeps individuals in the group. Tribes differ
from psychographic segments by their short life span and their diversity. It is
fair to say that postmodern neo-tribalism translates a need to belong not just to
one but to several groups simultaneously, and that tribal membership does not
involve set personality traits or same values, but expresses a shared experience
of maybe only some aspects of a person's personal history.
Where the notion of tribe achieves a break with Northern marketing is in the
comparison with the concept of segmentation, which until recently was thought
to provide reliable consumer profiles to the marketer:
. a tribe is defined as a network of heterogeneous persons ± in terms of
age, sex, income, etc. ± who are linked by a shared passion or emotion; a
tribe is capable of collective action, its members are not simple
consumers, they are also advocates;
. a segment is defined as a group of homogeneous persons ± they share The tribalisation
the same characteristics ± who are not connected to one another; a of society
segment is not capable of collective action, its members are simple
consumers.
Tribal membership arises from a shared experience of reality and is not derived
from an ordained consumer identikit based on quantitative analysis or 603
otherwise. Tribal analysis may defer to a kind of behavioural segmentation,
when all tribe members display similar behaviours or attitudes with respect to
a given product or service, but in general multiple tribal membership virtually
precludes consumer segmentation, since membership of one tribe is hardly
meaningfully discriminating.
Finally, the tribe is more than an all-pervasive vogue or society-engulfing
trend (Morace, 1996). Vogues and trends tend to ignore the shared emotions
and interactions among individuals, but tribes in contrast set great store by
them. This is why Latin thinking is uneasy with some concepts such as ``life
mode communities'' (Firat and Dholakia, 1998) that are positioned at the cross-
roads of trends, communities and lifestyles. Are they aggregated actors
without interactions of their members or are they concrete actors which result
from interpersonal experiences? And the tribe is not necessarily a ``brand
community'', which is defined as `à specialised, non-geographically-bound
community, based on a structured set of social relations among admirers of a
brand'' (Muniz and O'Guinn, 2001, p. 412). Brand communities are explicitly
commercial, whereas tribes are not. However, when a tribe is organised around
a same passion for a cult-object such as the Harley-Davidson, it exhibits many
similarities with a brand community.
The key concern of tribal marketing is to know which tribe(s) to support in
marketing terms. The tribal marketing approach places less emphasis on the
product or service for a ``specific'', `àverage'' consumer, or indeed a segment of
consumers. Instead it supports products and services that hold people together
as a group of enthusiasts or devotees. This includes anything that strengthens
community links and fosters a sense of tribal belonging and membership, the
``we-ness'' (Muniz and O'Guinn, 2001). The key word here is the ``linking value''
of the product/service (Cova, 1997b). This refers to the product's, or service's,
contribution to establishing and/or reinforcing bonds between individuals.
Such linking value is rarely intentionally embedded in the use value of the
product/service concept, yet it is a quality that merits our careful attention. The
greater the contribution of a product or service to the development and
strengthening of the tribal bond, the greater its linking value will be.
The Latin approach to marketing is also challenging the way customer
loyalty can be built. In this alternative view, one-to-one marketing and other
relationship marketing panaceas can be criticised on two fronts (Cova, 1997a;
Muniz and O'Guinn, 2001):
(1) They are limited in their attempt to be the closest to known customers,
without sharing any emotion with them. They confuse proximity and
European intimacy, and base everything on customer service. In fact, increasingly
Journal of people do not want to be simply the object of an individualised service in
Marketing terms of customisation of functions. They also want an emotional bond
of a collective nature.
36,5/6
(2) Relationship marketing approaches are short-sighted in how they look at
what they call the ``relation''. Whereas the individualistic approach to
604 relationship marketing aims at creating and developing a relation
between the brand or the firm (even a member of the firm) and a customer,
the tribal approach to marketing prefers to recreate and support the
relation between customers. Products, services, physical supports and
employees are dedicated to supporting the tribal link, not substituting for
it ± an often unfeasible and counter-productive task. The tribal inter-
relations exert pressure on members to remain loyal to the collective and
consequently to the brand.
As a consequence, it is possible to oppose a tribal way of building customer
loyalty to an individualistic one:
. whereas the individualistic approach focuses on the customer/company
relationship, the tribal approach focuses on the customer/customers
relationship;
. whereas the individualistic approach positions the company as a pole of
the relationship, the tribal approach positions the company as a support
of the relationship; company's members, products, services and
servicescapes are there to support the link between customers;
. whereas the individualistic approach uses such cognitive means as
loyalty cards, bulletin boards and so on, the tribal approach relies on
rituals and cult places;
. whereas the individualistic approach develops cognitive loyalty, the
tribal approach aims at building affective loyalty.
Identifying the tribe: seeing the ordinary with fresh eyes

Compared with consumer segments, tribes are not easy to identify using
modern marketing variables. Perhaps a metaphor from quantum physics can
be helpful in illustrating this difficulty. Tribes are like elementary particles:
hard to measure because they exist but do not exist. Tribes are fuzzy; more
societal sparkle than socio-economic certainty. They are shifting gatherings of
emotionally bonded people, open systems to which a person belongs and yet
does not quite belong. It takes a disruption in marketing know-how to
understand tribes. Modern, rational analysis likes to define the scope of a thing,
to describe its specific characteristics. But tribes will not brook this approach ;
their logic is too frail.
Take the tribe of CitroeÈn 2CV[3] enthusiasts. How many 2CV enthusiasts are
there? According to the CitroeÈn Car Club, the official international club, there
are around 120,000 members. But what is the significance of the response when
you know that there are more than 500,000 2CVs still in circulation? It is the The tribalisation
difference between the number of individuals that form the hard core of the of society
community, actively contributing to its organisation and life, and the total
number of individuals who still drive this legendary car. How many people
identify or sympathise with the 2CV, when, for example, there is a special
gathering in Canada or in France? And participating in these 2CV gatherings
does not exclude being a Beetle enthusiast either. So what are the 605
characteristics of the 2CV tribe members? Who are these people gathering
together and chatting about this ugly old car? Are they all old guys? Are they
young and nostalgic for a lost world? The CitroeÈn Car Club gives some
indications about their profile: people are anywhere between 18 and 76 years
old. They are students, white-collar workers or retirees. The analysis is
meaningless. The one significant fact is that 2CV enthusiasts tend to be found
outside big cities. Maybe not such a coincidence, after all, since big cities are
rather dangerous for such a car! In fact the bond of the 2CV tribe ± its
underlying logic, its shared experience, interpretation, representations,
discourse and action ± goes unnoticed through statistical surveys. Everything
unquantifiable and qualitative slips through the filter. What the 2CV tribe
members have in common is the pleasure of driving a car with a maximum
speed of 85 kilometres per hour and so to experience, as soon as they sit in it, a
sudden break with today's high-speed world. 2CV enthusiasts are weekend
warriors of sorts. The shared experience of breaking free from the stressing
work-week is a more powerful selector than any socio-demographic category.
Tribes convey signs with which members identify. Such signs, or traces of
identity, cannot express the totality of belonging but provide helpful hints and
put us on the path of understanding. We would argue that there are at least two
types of ``tribal traces'': temporal and spatial traces. In temporal terms tribes
emerge, grow, reach their zenith, languish, then dissolve. Their underlying
logic is timeless and fragmented. For example, in the funky music scene
(Cathus, 1998, p. 92) ``the tribe exists when it springs to life with the crowd. The
coteries, rock groups and posses, each with their own identity dissolve in the
crowd for a brief moment of existence. All differences vanish for an instant.
Even the most exclusive coteries join the flow and allow themselves to be swept
away by the flood''. Tribes also exist and occupy space physically. The tribe ±
or at least some of its members ± can gather and perform its rituals in public
spaces, assembly halls, meeting-places, places of worship or commemoration.
These spaces are `ànchoring places'' (Aubert-Gamet and Cova, 1999), which
provide a momentary home for the tribe. None of these time and space traces
exhausts the full potential of tribes. Tribal belonging exists on a daily basis at
home, as well as occasionally and informally with others anywhere. Some also
advocate that a tribe can be just a feeling, a fancy, a fantasy. Tribal members
are never alone, because they belong, in fact or virtually, to a vast and informal
community (Maffesoli, 2000).
The recognition of tribes requires a different and special effort (Maffesoli,
1996b). The marketer is well advised to cast aside the more traditional mono-
European disciplinary, systemic approaches and to favour practices based on detecting
Journal of signs, foraging for hints and exploring the unusual by undertaking:
Marketing . desk research on everything that can be said or written about the tribe in
36,5/6 newspapers and books, on chat lines, diffusion lists, Net forums; all that
done in a similar approach to that developed by Kozinets (1997) for his
606 X-files ``netnography'' in the USA;
. semi-structured interviews and non-structured interviews with
members on an individual or group basis (focus groups);
. participant and non-participant observations on specific places where
the tribe (or part of the tribe) gathers.

Figure 2 illustrates somewhat metaphorically[4] the signs that can be found in
the environment.
In this framework, the physical evidence of tribes is located on the horizontal
or ``visible'' axis (traces or evidences). This includes, on the temporal plane, the
moments when tribal members come together for their rituals (occasions), and
on the spatial plane, the physical meeting-places and virtual spaces
(institutions) where tribes convene. On the vertical or `ìnvisible'' axis (hints or
shadows), we detect the signs coming from day-to-day activities (the personal
and shared experiences) as well as the trends and vogues and other
constituents of fantasy and imagination that sweep briskly through society.
From this clutch of evidence we can work out the roles adopted by tribal
members in their dealings with one another and their surroundings. As Figure
3 illustrates, tribal members can adopt four roles. These are:
(1) a ``member'' of institutions (associations, religious sects);
(2) a ``participant'' in informal gatherings (demonstrations, happenings);
Figure 2.
The tribal clover
The tribalisation
of society
607
Figure 3.
Roles of tribe members
(3) a ``practitioner'' or adept who has quasi-daily involvement in tribal

activities;
(4) a ``sympathiser'' or fellow-traveller who moves with the vogues and
trends and is marginally/virtually integrated into the tribe.
Tribal marketing can take aim at all the members of the tribe at once, or focus
on a cross-section with a view (or not) to reaching the whole tribe.
Case study: marketing to the urban tribe of in-line roller-skaters

Like all tribes, in-line skaters have their `ìn groups'' and `òut groups''. The `ìns''
share an experience which produces a bond and distinguishes them from others
(we are tempted to say from ``normal'' people who are `òut''). To quote a
Parisian skater: `ìn the street, cars blast their horn at you and run you down ; in
the bike lanes, it's the riders who yell and holler at you ; and on the sidewalk,
it's the pedestrians who scream in anger''.
The in-line skaters have been around as a recognisable tribal group since the
mid-1990s. In 1999, this group was identifiable in a number of ways (Figure 4).
Visible traces include physical gatherings of urban skaters:
. two large national gatherings took place in Paris during 1999; in
September Roller City brought together 15,000 people for a skate
through the city ; in October Tatoo Roller-Skating assembled 10,000 for
the same purpose;
. regular, local gatherings, called Friday Night Fever, took place weekly,
naturally on Friday evening, in Paris at around 10 p.m.; in the Place
d'Italie anywhere from 3,000-5,000 skaters congregated and set off for a
European
Journal of
Marketing
36,5/6
608
Figure 4.
The in-line skaters tribe
in 1999 France
night-time skate through the city; similar gatherings also took place on
Friday evenings in Bordeaux, Lyon, Marseille, Rennes and Strasbourg.
Other visible traces included the public meetings of such Parisian associations
as Roller & Coquillages, Paris Roller and the Roller Squad Institut. Nationally,
there was the French Federation of Roller-Skating (established in 1990) with
28,000 card-carrying members! There were also special gatherings like the
Plage du Prado in Marseille, where hundreds of skaters congregated daily, and
also specialist Web sites, where skaters met to chat and connect with fellow-
members of the tribe.
The invisible side was equally rich in tribal potential. Daily skating offered
benefits to fitness freaks as well as to stunt skaters. It has been estimated that
there were over two million in-line skaters in 1999 France, compared with only
10,000 just 15 years before. There were as many female as male skaters who
skated for fun, as a means of transport, or as a sport. Hard to estimate ±
because they were less visible ± was the number of people who were part of the
in-line skating vogue, maybe not skaters but enthusiasts who relate to the more
active members of the tribe. There were even smaller tribal factions which
found expression through internal rivalries: for example, fitness skaters and
stunt skaters belong to antagonizingly different worlds.
The primary task of tribal marketing is to consider the product or service
from the angle of its linking rather than its use value (Cova, 1999). It is more
important for the firm to know how its product or service can support the tribe
in its very being than how to deliver the offer to the consumer. Here the notion
of ritual is critically important to describe the way companies marketed to the
in-line roller tribe (`ìntensive tribal marketing''). Durkheim (1912) discovered
that rituals endow a social entity with permanence. Just as every lasting social
relationship requires some kind of ritual to establish and sustain itself, so too a
tribe relies on rituals to pronounce its existence and sustain its membership.
Large social events and small local gatherings display rituals which can be The tribalisation
leveraged by tribal marketing activities. Such meetings are opportunities to of society
reaffirm and strengthen the underlying values of the group at the same time as
they bring together and bond the individual member with the tribe. Rituals are
a tribe's expression of shared beliefs and social belonging (Segalen, 1998). To
perform their function at social gatherings, rituals need to be supported in
various ways. Examples include the use of sacred or cult objects, ritual 609
clothing, sacred or ceremonial places, magical or ritual words, idols, icons and
sacred images.
For the tribe of in-line skaters, it is clear that the notion of ritual provided
manufacturers and marketers with a number of opportunities to strengthen the

tribal bond. Take cult objects, for example. Rollerblade, the brand of the
founding father of in-line skating and professional hockey player, Scott Olsson,
springs to mind. In the early 1980s Scott Olsson had the brilliant idea of
replacing the blade of his hockey skates with four in-line rollers. Another firm,
Roces, immediately recognised the value of Olsson's idea and signed a licensing
contract with him. Roces then handled the research and development of the
product, while Olsson through Rollerblade handled marketing and sales. In
1999, Rollerblade was owned by Benetton and remained a cult object among
the members of the in-line skating tribe, even in the face of stiff opposition from
the likes of Salomon, Fila and many others (K2, Razors, Oxygen, Tecnica,
Rossignol, Roces, Nike . . .).
Look now at the manufacturers of ritual clothing for in-line skaters! This
encompassed a full range of accessories, including shoes, key chains, hats,
belts, backpacks, sun-glasses ± the list is endless. Many companies have
jumped into the market: Pawn, Senate, USD, England . . . They have positioned
themselves in such a way as to target sub-tribes ± e.g. stunt skaters ± which
had their special practices and rituals and their own special dress codes.
There were also companies which offered special events or places for tribes
of in-line skaters. As was mentioned above, Tatoo (the pager or bipper
launched by France TeÂleÂcom) organised the Tatoo Roller-Skating in Paris and
sponsored a series of events around the country. They have even increased
their commitment by opening a Web site dedicated to in-line roller skating.
Salomon organised a night-time skating escapade through the city of
Strasbourg with 3,000 participants and Kellogg's supported a number of active
skating clubs affiliated with the French Federation of Roller-Skaters (FFRS).
Then there were the many special words that belong to the vocabulary of the
skating tribe. In France, tribe members used English words like ``stunt'',
``tricks'', ``shine'' and ``mega''. It is difficult to give examples of companies which
were positioned in this segment apart from tribal magazines such as Crazy
Roller, Urban, Roller Saga or Roller Mag.
Finally there were the high profile idols and icons, the divas of in-line
skating who were supported by leading firms. Internationally, they included
Aaron Feinberg sponsored by Salomon, Matt Salerno under contract with Fila,
European and many others. Such sponsorship could be found at both the local and
Journal of national level.
Marketing And moreover, companies willing to do marketing with the in-line roller
tribe considered that, beyond their products or services, they might have a
36,5/6 brand or corporate linking value by the way they interacted with the tribe:
helping in the mobilising of the collective competencies of its members,
610 ascribing value to the shared emotion of its members, supporting the
(re)construction or (re)possession of meanings by the tribe, assisting the tribe in
its interactions with other collective actors in order to influence the public
domain.
Some marketing activity takes place outside the context of rituals and tribal
supports. Such activity is primarily aimed at the fraction of tribal sympathisers
who identify with, but stand silently apart from, the mainstream tribal
membership (`èxtensive tribal marketing''). For instance, Ford launched Ka
Roller, a limited series of 3,000 units, to capitalise on the trend. Its advertising
slogans showed that Ford was promoting a product more than a bond : ``With
Ford Ka, you will thread your way through the city like a skater!''; ``With my Ka
Roller, everything is in-line!''
Brands like Tatoo built on tribal bonds with in-line skaters to emphasise the
bonding value of its offer. In this instance the tribe of in-line skaters was the
focus of marketing and an important element of brand identity together with an
ingredient of global offering. Tatoo enabled tribal members to stay in contact,
whether they belong to the tribe of in-line skaters or another tribe. Like Magic
fanatics who haunt Magic CafeÂs everywhere, the simple fact that there was a
fanatical tribe of in-line skaters legitimatised the linking value of Tatoo. In
contrast, an effort by the French bank, Caisse d'Epargne, to promote a tribal
savings account named ``Tribu'' has been a dismal failure, because there was no
specific linking value in the offer.
Of course the approach has its limits and Tatoo had to be cautious not to
position itself as the pager of in-line skaters! Tatoo's target market was much
bigger than the in-line skaters' tribe, as its advertising spots wittily
demonstrate. Tatoo used imaginary tribes, such as the Tribe of Santa Clauses
and the Tribe of Snowmen, to avoid narrow identification with an existing
tribe, thus extending its appeal. The astonishing success of the brand Helly
Hansen also illustrates the point. Popular among skippers of racing yachts, the
Helly Hansen line of clothing has become the rage among rappers! Its Bubble
garment became a cult item in France ± in one year (1997) sales jumped from
100 to 10,000 ± and now represents an estimated 15 per cent of world-wide
sales! Rather than ignore the surprising success of its brand, Helly Hansen
softly supported it by sponsoring rap groups like Manau. At the same time, it
continued to stress the themes of genuineness and quality. In its 1998/1999
advertising campaign this resulted in an emphasis on the sporting goods
connection of its products and the up-market quality of its label. Its advertising
campaign included images of skiers being dropped high up on the mountain
slopes by helicopter! What happened to the rapper?
The company side of tribal marketing: Salomon The tribalisation
In 1994, Salomon was a very traditional brand, a little bit outdated, but still a of society
world leader in winter sports equipment. It served people skiing on ``closed''
tracks and was completely excluded from new `òpen'' winter playgrounds
where ``style sports'' were practised. This also means that it was excluded from
new forms of distribution channels. One of these style sports was the
snowboard. Snowboarding was not considered a winter game; its roots were to 611
be found in urban passions. Snowboarders represented a marginal group, a
tribe, which structured itself against the whole universe of skiing (federations,
clothes, brands. . .). They wanted to stay apart from traditional skiers. They
had their own small manufacturers (more than 150 craftsmen), their own
distribution channels (Pro-Shops), their cult-brand (Burton) and they hated
Salomon, which was considered a ``daddy's brand''.
In 1994, Salomon decided to focus on the snowboard phenomenon. The
watchword was ``Be humble!'': ``We are starting from scratch'', ``We will be low
profile'', ``We will go there to listen''. . . The aim was to build and develop
proximity between Salomon and the snowboarders. This was mainly done
through participant observation by Salomon people. In 1995, Salomon decided
to set up a marketing unit made up of snowboarders. It designed a specific
``logo'' for its snowboard activities and supported a team of good snowboarders
fitted out with non-Salomon boards (Salomon boards did not yet exist!). Some
of the tribe members were invited to join the design of Salomon projects.
In 1996, Salomon was ready to launch its snowboard production. No
advertising, just physical presence at summer camps and the launching of an
advanced batch of 200 boards for the pro-shops (not the traditional winter
sports channels). At the Grenoble exhibition, Salomon boards were on pro-shop
stands, not on Salomon's, clearly showing a different type of approach:
Salomon respected the special nature of the tribe. The following year Salomon
launched its marketing approach to the snowboard tribe:
. huge presence on playgrounds with boards to be tested by
snowboarders without any incentive to buy (``we are just there'');
. presence at cult places;
. advertising in tribal media with a great variety of visuals; and
. support for contests and events.
In 1999, Salomon rose to Number 3 in the snowboarding French market.
Along with this first foray into the tribal world with the snowboard,
Salomon investigated the ways of supporting the in-line roller tribe. This
approach was more systematic:
(1) Phase 1, Ethnomarketing: Salomon moves closer to the in-line skaters
(1995-1996):
. analysis of rituals and practice codes;
. encounters with the milieu;
European . presence at in-line events;
Journal of . participant observation of in-line skaters.
Marketing (2) Phase 2, Co-Design: Salomon launches its in-line activities (1997-1998):
36,5/6 . design of products in collaboration with skaters;
. work on distinctive features of the product with skaters;
612
. product tests by a team of skaters supported by Salomon.
(3) Phase 3, Tribal Support: Salomon takes root in the in-line skate tribe
(1999):
. Salomon is an embedded actor who shares the values of the tribe;

. Salomon supports in-line events not by placing an ad (streamer) but
by promoting the practice (contests);
. Salomon creates new events and helps in the building of in-line
structures;
. Salomon supports the shared passion of in-line skaters.
In 1999, Salomon achieved 15 per cent of its turnover in snowboard and in-line
skate activities. Salomon became No. 3 in the world for in-line products. This
has changed the positioning of the brand in the minds of the consumers.
Salomon now organises its marketing approach around the ideas of practices,
tribes and passions. It has a new slogan, ``Freedom action sports'', a new
graphic identity (the logo of the snowboard activities becomes the logo of the
brand) and a new type of communication, more non-verbal than verbal. Now,
Salomon focuses on increasing tribal marketing approaches with such tribes as
snowbladers.
One way to measure the quality of Salomon's approach is to compare it with
those approaches developed by its direct competitors in the same market. In
1997, there were four major companies seeking to penetrate the in-line roller
market: Salomon, Nike, Fila, and Rossignol. Only Salomon succeeded. Fila and
Rossignol faced major sales disillusions in trying to enter the tribal market as if
it were a classical market, i.e. starting with a product offer! Nike also threw in
the towel after a while. In contrast, people from Salomon humbly approached
the tribe; they did not seek to get a market foothold, but to join a tribe and to
support its rituals. If we pursue the parallel with business-to-business markets
(Hakansson and Snehota, 1995), we can say that they gained a network
position. After that, they were allowed to think about bringing their products to
the members of the tribe.
Tribal marketing and after: societing

Tribes such as in-line skaters provide opportunities for marketers to engage in
symbiotic relationships with groups of consumers. The best thing about these
tribes is that they do not wait to be invited to participate (Aubert-Gamet, 1997),
they just get on with it. Marketers who understand the structure and ethos of a
tribe as Salomon has done can profit from supporting it. In addition to The tribalisation
providing necessary supports for the functioning of the tribe, marketers can of society
also assist in the socialisation of new members, facilitate communications
within the tribe, and support events and other experiences that provide havens
for the activities of the tribe (Schouten and McAlexander, 1995). And rather
than limit themselves to the status of non-participant observers, marketers can
involve themselves with members of the tribe in shared, high emotion and 613
ritual experiences. These methodologies are based on high emotional
involvement with consumers and resemble an anthropology of consumption
(Sherry, 1995). Some define this range of methods as ethnomarketing or
market-oriented ethnography (Arnould and Wallendorf, 1994). These methods

enable observation of how the meaning embedded in products is transferred
from the product to consumers or how it is altered, diverted and twisted
through everyday experiences.
All this contributes to a loss of control on the part of the company in its
relation to the market and the consumers. Marketers in Salomon aim more at
supporting than at controlling the tribe. They treat members of the tribes as
partners in market and non-market activities. In doing so, Salomon breaks
down the wall between the sphere of the market and that of society. In its
search for authentic interaction with the tribe, the company is progressively
obliged to adopt some of the rules and norms of the tribe. This has direct
consequences on the way people are managed inside the company; some of its
operating modes in terms of human relations may be altered (ReÂmy, 2001). It is
not just a question of serving a community, it is a question of being a member
of it. And this community is not a ``brand community'' (Muniz and O'Guinn,
2001) but a community supported by a brand, which is slightly different. The
very idea of building a brand community is in fact a Promethean dream of
marketers which rarely becomes a reality. It is much more interesting and
socially responsive to support social tribes than to dominate markets, as
consumers resist market logics and corporate interests more and more.
Here, the idea of partnership between the company and the tribe is another
crucial dimension of the tribal approach. If we consider the tribe as an actor
capable of collective action, such as are industrial districts or industrial
networks, it is possible to incorporate the tribal experience into the company
model: customers are co-developers of tribal experiences and tribal
competencies that can be mobilised by the company, just as Salomon did when
co-opting skaters to co-design its products. The recognition that tribes are a
source of competencies forces marketers to lower the boundaries of the
company (Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2000): the tribe is not outside the
company, it is part of the company network, just as the company is part of the
tribe. All these connoisseurs, regulars, adepts and other collectors produce, in
their shared experiences of re-appropriation, a collective expertise of the
product, service or brand that can be beneficial for the company, if taken into
account by the marketers; and, if not, it may be a source of negative rumours. In
European any case, they avoid the attitude of the `àtomized dupes'' (Kozinets,
Journal of forthcoming), who are manipulated by the brands and the market.
Marketing The central leitmotif of Societing ± the link is more important than the thing
± is clearly perceptible in these examples of tribal marketing approaches. The
36,5/6
business firm acts at the societal or micro-social level, which is the level of
concrete actors (Desjeux, 1996). It operates in a way close to the ``social
614 exchange'' as defined by Belk and Coon (1993): it does not look for a balanced or
even negative reciprocity in exchange for what it gives the tribe. The tribe and
the business firm are more in a system of perpetual mutual indebtedness than
in one of reciprocity. The partner in the exchange is not viewed as a
commodity; it comes to be seen as part of the extended self. The return on

investment will come later or perhaps never. As described by Kozinets
(forthcoming) in the Burning Man experience, the presence of the market is
acceptable for the tribe as long as the exploitative motive, manipulation and
socially isolating outcomes of the market can be said to be absent. The
company's first move is non-market and has a purely societal anchoring,
whereas the second move will allow the company to return to the market with
the support of the tribe; a kind of partnership to influence the public domain. It
has a clear market anchorage. The core of the societing effort is to support a
tribe of enthusiasts, whereas the core of the marketing effort is to serve a
market (Figure 5).
Some researchers could put limits on these efforts, arguing that ``consumers
would not like the experiential enclaves contaminated by intrusions from other
enclaves'' (Firat and Dholakia, 1998, p. 158) and that any attempt to capitalise
on a tribe will melt into thin air. We are not sure that the concept of enclave is
fit for tribalisation. Tribes can co-exist side by side with mainstream society in
a complex and intertwined fashion, allowing many re-combinations. The soft
marketisation of some of the tribe symbols and recreated meanings, with its
agreement and its help, is not always synonymous with colonisation, ``selling
out'', and, consequently, rejection by the tribe members.
Figure 5.
A different anchorage of
the effort
Some managers could say that there is nothing new under the sun, and that The tribalisation
these kinds of tribal support have always existed. As a matter of fact, they may of society
have existed in a pre-modern form but have vanished from marketing today.
For example, in the South of France, Ricard, which produces a very well-known
alcoholic beverage Pastis, has supported the peÂtanque[5] groupings and
competitions for many years. It is noteworthy that this support was dedicated
to a geographically bounded group of people, whereas tribes are more 615
conceptually bounded, and that there was no attempt to co-opt and integrate
customers' competencies, whereas tribal approaches are willing to open the
company to an outside collective actor. Finally, even the return to pre-modern
practices can be seen as a way of softening the pure business orientation of the
company.
Other authors argue that societing is just another buzzword to hide ``the
ability of the market to co-opt, usurp and commodify, as a part of mainstream
culture, the subversions attempted by the consumers'' (Firat and Dholakia,
1998, p. 64). Globally, societing would be another vehicle of hypercapitalism
(Rifkin, 2000). On the contrary, we think that these critics neglect a reverse
movement of hypercapitalism that forces business firms to relinquish part of
their power in dealing with tribes of enthusiasts. This movement pushes
companies outside the market sphere and involves them in societal efforts. To
be intimate with tribal enthusiasts requires the firm to act as a voluntary
organisation. In fact, we are not so sure that there is only one move: the
invasion of the societal sphere by the market sphere. There may well be a
reverse move: the invasion of the market sphere by the societal sphere. More
and more tribes of enthusiasts want to play a part in the firm's decisions that
concern their object of passion. And this phenomenon is likely to take on a new
and larger shape with the development of the Internet.
On the Internet, virtual tribes structured around a shared passion are
growing rapidly (Rauch and Thunqvist, 2000). These emotional tribes that we
see as something more than just ``communities of interest'' (cf. Northern
cybermarketing approaches) are to be considered with care: `Ònline consumers
are much more active, participative, resistant, activist, loquacious, social and
communitarian than they have previously been thought to be'' (Kozinets, 1999,
p. 261). In order to support these e-tribes, it is not enough to open a new Web
site. It is important to support the myriad Web sites that already exist. ``The
goal is not to control the information, but to use it wisely in order to build solid,
long-lasting relationships'' (Kozinets, 1999, p. 263). For example, the French
automotive manufacturer CitroeÈn undertakes tribal marketing on the Web in
support of a selected number of the 1,500 ``Citroenthusiasts'' sites. This is in
addition to its official CitroeÈn Web site. In doing so, CitroeÈn facilitates the
emotional experience these enthusiasts can have on the Web. But even this is
not sufficient. Tribes of cyberenthusiasts want to take part in decisions and
they have the power to do so. In fact, if you do not want to play with tribes of
enthusiasts, never mind, they will play with you anyway! And they will force
the company to adopt Societing.
European Societing is an approach which is willing to establish mutually beneficial
Journal of compromises between market and society rather than an approach that targets
Marketing the colonisation of one by the other, or the enclavisation of one versus the other.
The notion of tribe gives the business firm the opportunity to develop such an
36,5/6 approach. Thus, ``the company is not only a simple economic actor adapting to
the market, but a social actor relating to the societal context'' (Badot et al., 1993,
616 p. 51).
Conclusion
In this paper, the tribe of in-line skaters has been used to illustrate the
marketer's exciting task of identifying, supporting and integrating neo-tribes in

today's society. Opportunity depends on a willingness to discard mechanical
marketing thinking and adopt a fuzzy logic, which places the link at the heart
of the offering strategy. This implies, both in market research and in offering
strategies, the tempering of the psychosocial view with an ethnosociological
approach, which is able to take into account the shared experience of
consumers in their tribal groupings in order to integrate it into the business
model.
The Internet, which provides a powerful tool for people to link and act
together in tribes without restrictions of time and space, is bringing to light the
need to develop a Societing approach to go hand-in-hand with the increasing
issue of re-socialisation of the individuals.
Notes
1. Also called the Southern School of Marketing or the Mediterranean School of Marketing.
2. In-line roller skates resemble ice-skates with the blade replaced by four `ìn-line'' rollers.
3. The 2CV is the cheap car launched by CitroeÈn at the beginning of the 1950s. This `ùgly''
car was in production until the end of the 1980s. It is now a cult-object.
4. The clover is directly linked with superstition, and so with archaic values.
5. Game of bowls.
References
Arnould, E. and Wallendorf, M. (1994), ``Market-oriented ethnography: interpretation building
and marketing strategy formulation'', Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. XXXI,
pp. 484-504.
Aubert-Gamet, V. (1997), ``Twisting servicescapes: diversion of the physical environment in a re-
appropriation process'', International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 8,
No. 1, pp. 26-41.
Aubert-Gamet, V. and Cova, B. (1999), ``Servicescapes: from modern non-places to postmodern
commonplaces'', Journal of Business Research, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 37-45.
Badot, O., Bucci, A. and Cova, B. (1993), ``Societing: managerial response to European
aestheticization'', European Management Journal, Special issue, EAP 20th Anniversary,
pp. 48-55.
Bagozzi, R.P. (2000), `Òn the concept of intentional social action in consumer behavior'', Journal
of Consumer Research, Vol. 27, December, pp. 388-96.
Bauman, Z. (1990), Thinking Sociologically, Blackwell, Oxford.
Belk, R.W. and Coon, G.S. (1993), ``Gift giving as agapic love: an alternative to the exchange The tribalisation
paradigm based on dating experience'', Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20, December,
pp. 393-417. of society
Bounds, E.M. (1997), Coming Together/Coming Apart: Religion, Community and Modernity,
Routledge, New York, NY.
Brito, C. and Araujo, L. (1993), `À model of collective action in industrial networks'', Proceedings
of the 9th IMP Conference, Bath, September.
617
Bromberger C. (Ed.) (1998), Passions ordinaires: du match de football au concours de dicteÂe,
Bayard, Paris.
Brownlie, D., Saren, M., Wensley, R. and Whittington, R. (1999), ``Marketing disequilibrium: on
redress and restoration'', in Brownlie, D., Saren, M., Wensley, R. and Whittington, R. (Eds),
Rethinking Marketing: Towards Critical Marketing Accountings, Sage, London, pp. 1-22.
Cassano, F. (1996), Il Pensiero Meridiano, Laterza, Milano.
Cathus, O. (1998), L'aÃme-sueur. Le funk et les musiques populaires du XXe sieÁcle, DescleÂe de
Brouwer, Paris.
Celsi, R.L., Randall, L.R. and Leigh, T.W. (1993), `Àn exploration of high-risk leisure
consumption through sky-diving'', Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20, June, pp. 1-23.
Club de Marseille (1994), Parier sur l'homme, Editions de l'Aube, Paris.
Cooper, S. and McLoughlin, D. (1998), `À semiotic analysis of the Simpsons'', Proceedings of the
27th European Marketing Association Conference, Stockholm.
Cova, B. (1997a), ``Relationship marketing: a view from the South'', in Meenaghan, T. (Ed.), New
and Emerging Paradigms, AMA Special Conference, University College Dublin, June,
pp. 657-72.
Cova, B. (1997b), ``Community and consumption: towards a definition of the linking value of
products or services'', European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 3/4, pp. 297-316.
Cova, B. (1999), ``From marketing to societing: when the link is more important than the thing'', in
Brownlie, D., Saren, M., Wensley, R. and Whittington, R. (Eds) Rethinking Marketing:
Towards Critical Marketing Accountings, Sage, London, pp. 65-83.
Desjeux, D. (1996), ``Scale of observation: a micro-sociological epistemology of social science
practice'', Visual Sociology, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 45-55.
Dibie, P. (1998), La passion du regard: essai contre les sciences froides, MeÂtailieÂ, Paris.
Durkheim, E. (1912), Les formes eÂleÂmentaires de la vie religieuse, Alcan, Paris.
Elliott, R. (1997), `Èxistential consumption and irrational desire'', European Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 31 No. 3/4, pp. 285-96.
Elliott, R. (1999), ``Symbolic meaning and postmodern consumer culture'', in Brownlie, D., Saren,
M., Wensley, R. and Whittington, R. (Eds), Rethinking Marketing: Towards Critical
Marketing Accountings, Sage, London, pp. 111-25.
Firat, A.F. and Dholakia, N. (1998), Consuming People: From Political Economy to Theatres of
Consumption, Sage, London.
Firat, A.F. and Shultz, C.J. II (1997), ``From segmentation to fragmentation: markets and marketing
strategy in the postmodern era'', European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 3/4, pp. 183-207.
Firat, A.F. and Venkatesh, A. (1993), ``Postmodernity: the age of marketing'', International
Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 10, pp. 227-49.
Godbout, J.T. (2000), Le don, la dette et l'identiteÂ: homo donator vs homo oeconomicus, La
DeÂcouverte, Paris.
Godbout, J.T. and CailleÂ, A. (1992), L'esprit du don, La DeÂcouverte, Paris.
European Goulding, C., Shankar, A. and Elliott, R. (2001), ``Dance clubs, `rave' and the consumer experience:
an exploratory study of a cultural phenomenon'', Proceedings of the European Association
Journal of for Consumer Research Annual Conference, Berlin.
Marketing Hakansson, H. and Snehota, I. (Eds) (1995), Developing Relationships in Business Networks,
36,5/6 Routledge, London.
Kozinets, R.V. (1997), `Ì want to believe: a netnography of the X-files subculture of consumption'',
Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 24, ACR, Provo, UT, pp. 470-5.
618
Kozinets, R.V. (1999), `È-tribalized marketing? The strategic implications of virtual communities
of consumption'', European Management Journal, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 252-64.
Kozinets, R.V. (forthcoming), ``Burning man: can consumers escape the market?'', Journal of
Consumer Research.
Maffesoli, M. (1996a), The Time of the Tribes, Sage, London.

Maffesoli, M. (1996b), Eloge de la raison sensible, Grasset, Paris.
Maffesoli, M. (2000), L'instant eÂternel. le retour du tragique dans les socieÂteÂs postmodernes,
DenoeÈl, Paris.
Meamber, L. and Venkatesh, A. (2000), `Èthnoconsumerist methodology for cultural and cross-
cultural consumer research'' in Beckmann, S. and Elliott, R.H. (Eds), Interpretive Consumer
Research : Paradigms, Methodologies & Applications, CBS Press, Copenhagen, pp. 87-108.
Morace, F. (1996), Metatendenze: Percorsi, prodotti e progetti per il terzo millennio, Sperling &
Kupfer, Milano.
Moscovici, S. (1998), ``Le domaine de la psychologie sociale'', in Moscovici, S. (Ed.), Psychologie
Sociale, 7th ed., PUF, Paris, pp. 5-22.
Muniz, A.M. and O'Guinn, T.C. (2001), ``Brand community'', Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 27, March, pp. 412-32.
Ostergaard, P. and Jantzen, C. (2000), ``Shifting perspectives in consumer research: from buyer
behaviour to consumption studies'', in Beckmann, S. and Elliott, R.H. (Eds), Interpretive
Consumer Research : Paradigms, Methodologies & Applications, CBS Press, Copenhagen,
pp. 9-23.
Prahalad, C.K. and Ramaswamy, V. (2000), ``Co-opting customer competence'', Harvard Business
Review, January-February, pp. 79-87.
Rauch, D. and Thunqvist, G. (2000), ``Virtual tribes: postmodern consumers in cyberspace'',
unpublished Master's thesis, The Market Academy, Stockholm University, Stockholm.
ReÂmy, E. (2001), ``Le lien social dans le marketing des services'', Revue FrancËaise du Marketing,
No. 181, pp. 97-108.
Rifkin, J. (2000), The Age of Access, The New Culture of Hypercapitalism Where All Life Is a Paid-
for Experience, Putnam's Sons, New York, NY.
Schouten, J.W. and McAlexander, J.H. (1995), ``Subcultures of consumption: an ethnography of
the new bikers'', Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 22, June, pp. 43-61.
Segalen, M. (1998), Rites et rituels contemporains, Nathan, Paris.
Shankar, A. and Elliott, R. (1999), ``Consuming popular music: critical socio-cultural perspectives
and research implications'', WP Bristol Business School, Bristol.
Sherry, J.F. (1991), ``Postmodern alternatives: the interpretive turn in consumer research'', in
Robertson, T. and Kassarjian, H. (Eds), Handbook of Consumer Behavior, Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 548-91.
Sherry, J.F. (Ed.) (1995), Contemporary Marketing and Consumer Behavior: An Anthropological
Sourcebook, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Sherry, J.F. (2000), ``Distraction, destruction, deliverance: the presence of mindscape in The tribalisation
marketing's new millennium'', Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 18 No. 6/7, pp. 328-
36. of society
Sikka, P. (1999), ``Critical management ± reaching beyond the academy'', opening speech of the
Critical Management Studies 1st Conference, Manchester, July.
Thompson, C.J. and Holt, D.B. (1996), ``Communities and consumption: research on consumer
strategies for constructing communal relationships in a postmodern world'', Advances in
Consumer Research, Vol. 23, ACR, Provo, UT, pp. 204-5. 619
Venkatesh, A. (1995), `Èthnoconsumerism: a new paradigm to study cultural and cross-cultural
consumer behavior'', in Costa, J.A. and Bamossy, G.J. (Eds), Marketing in a Multicultural
World: Ethnicity, Nationalism, and Cultural Identity, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 26-67.
Appendix 1. The Latin School of Societing

The vast majority of French, Italian and Spanish marketing researchers do not emphasise their
differences with North-American or North-European thinking. They position themselves or
within the dominant North-American stream of marketing management or within the promising
stream of Relationship Marketing, while displaying their virtual membership in the Nordic
School of Services Marketing and/or in the Scandinavian School of Industrial Marketing.
In contrast, a group of French, Italian and Spanish researchers are gathering around what we
call the ``Latin School of Societing''. Their common denominator is to be born on the edge of the
Mediterranean Sea ± a small, warm closed piece of water compared with the vast Atlantic and
Pacific Oceans ± and to assert their identity (Cassano, 1996). Their shared thinking can be traced
in the following simple manifesto, which is clearly embedded in the Mediterranean way of life
(Cova, 1997a):
. people like to gather together in tribes even ± and especially ± in the age of
individualism;
. everyday practices are made of re-appropriation, diversion and distortion of the
dominant system of meanings, not only of mere participation in this system.
Actors of the Latin School call for `à knowledge of the Southern type'' (Maffesoli, 1996b, p. 217).
They believe that there is a close connection between individualism, rationalism, utilitarianism
and universalism, which reflect Northern thinking, and that there is a close relation between
community, affectivity, futility and resistance, which are characteristic of Southern thinking
(Morace, 1996). Latin researchers also hold (Club de Marseille, 1994) that Mediterranean-specific
cultural traits have fostered the development of human attitudes oriented towards being,
experiencing and gathering together, that is to say a high propensity to self-organise in micro-
groups. Parier sur l'homme (Betting on the Human), the title of Club de Marseille's book, is a
paradigmatic axis for research programmes: we cannot live without human relationships and
shared emotions; they are at the centre of our everyday life and therefore orient our research on
societing.
Societing has been defined by Latin researchers as `à socially relevant perspective of the
marketing, design and R&D interface''. In a societing approach ``the company is not only a simple
economic actor adapting to the market, but a social actor relating to the societal context'' (Badot
et al., 1993, p. 51).
Appendix 2. The Lomo tribe

Lomo stands for Leningradskoye Optiko-Mekhanicheskoye Ob'edinyeniye. The Lomo is a small,
low-tech camera ± there is no need to focus, set a light meter, use a flash, or, for that matter, look
through a viewfinder. ``Photography is heavy-weight: serious, demanding and difficult'' says
Stephan Pauly, a Lomo tribe member from Berlin. ``Lomography is charming, easy, nice,
happening. Fun.'' In 1991, Austrian student Matthias Fiegl found an old metal Russian camera in
a dusty shop in Prague and brought it back to his Vienna flat. During one of the wild, open-house
European parties he and his room-mate Wolgang Stranzinger used to throw, Fiegl began snapping pictures
of everyone and everything. He held the camera at his hip, or above his head. The results were
Journal of blurred, distorted, abstract ± and exciting. Lomography was born. What began as a parlour trick
Marketing has become a tribal movement across Europe. Fiegl and Stranzinger tacked their new images up on
a kitchen bulletin board and called it LomoWall. They founded the Lomographic Society. They
36,5/6 started bringing more Lomos from Eastern Europe and, once 100 people had the cameras, the
group mounted its first exhibition, in Vienna. Now, about 35,000 people own the cult-object,
620 including David Byrne and Brian Eno, and the most enthusiastic preachers have been designated
Lomo `àmbassadors'', running `èmbassies'' everywhere from Cuba to Japan. In 1998, the first Lomo
Congress was held in Madrid, with 15,000 images on a 108m-long LomoWall, while a Lomomobil (a
schoolbus) toured Western Germany, displaying pictures and renting out Lomos to curiosity-
seekers. ``Lomo creates a shared feeling about what is going on around you. In the end,
Lomography is a product of communication'', explains Gerald Matt, director of Vienna's

Kunsthalle, a contemporary art space. Lomography ``has an anarchic approach to the world of
pictures'', says Matt. `Ìt's about fast shots, impossible perspectives, gloomy and spectacular
colours, anonymity. The whole Lomo thing doesn't care whether it is art or not''.
This article has been cited by:
1. Chandra Sekhar Patro, Madhu Kishore Raghunath Kamakula. 183. [Crossref]

2. Rebecca Mardon, Mike Molesworth, Georgiana Grigore. 2018. YouTube Beauty Gurus and the emotional
labour of tribal entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Research 92, 443-454. [Crossref]
3. Silvia Ranfagni, Andrea Runfola. 2018. Connecting passion: Distinctive features from emerging
entrepreneurial profiles. Journal of Business Research 92, 403-411. [Crossref]
4. Giuseppe Pedeliento, Cristina Bettinelli, Daniela Andreini, Mara Bergamaschi. 2018. Consumer
entrepreneurship and cultural innovation: The case of GinO12. Journal of Business Research 92, 431-442.
[Crossref]
5. Marine Boyaval, Maud Herbert. 2018. One for all and all for one? The bliss and torment in communal
entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Research 92, 412-422. [Crossref]

6. Jinhyon Kwon Hammick, Ilyoung Ju. 2018. Facebook fan page: the effect of perceived socialness in
consumer–brand communication. Journal of Marketing Communications 24:7, 686-702. [Crossref]
7. Oskaras Vorobjovas-Pinta. 2018. Gay neo-tribes: Exploration of travel behaviour and space. Annals of
Tourism Research 72, 1-10. [Crossref]
8. Cheng Suang Heng, Zhijie Lin, Xiaoying Xu, Ying Zhang, Yixuan Zhao. 2018. Human Flesh Search:
What Did We Find?. Information & Management . [Crossref]
9. Stephen Henderson, Karl Spracklen. 2018. ‘Plus ça Change, Plus C'est la Même Chose’: Music Promoting,
Digital Leisure, Social Media and Community. Leisure Sciences 40:4, 239-250. [Crossref]
10. Dimitra Papadimitriou, Artemisia Apostolopoulou. 2018. Capturing the meanings of sport licensed
products. Journal of Marketing Communications 24:5, 433-449. [Crossref]
11. Hauke A. Wetzel, Stefan Hattula, Maik Hammerschmidt, Harald J. van Heerde. 2018. Building and
leveraging sports brands: evidence from 50 years of German professional soccer. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science 46:4, 591-611. [Crossref]
12. Margurite Hook, Stacey Baxter, Alicia Kulczynski. 2018. Antecedents and consequences of participation
in brand communities: a literature review. Journal of Brand Management 25:4, 277-292. [Crossref]
13. . Literature 213-221. [Citation] [Enhanced Abstract] [PDF] [PDF]
14. Jeremy J. Sierra, Harry A. Taute. 2018. Brand tribalism in technology and sport: determinants and
outcomes. Journal of Brand Management 34. . [Crossref]
15. Valerie Gannon, Andrea Prothero. 2018. Beauty bloggers and YouTubers as a community of practice.
Journal of Marketing Management 34:7-8, 592-619. [Crossref]
16. Elizabeth Mamali, Peter Nuttall, Avi Shankar. 2018. Formalizing consumer tribes. Marketing Theory 2,
147059311876772. [Crossref]
17. SamuelAnthony, Anthony Samuel, PeattieKen, Ken Peattie, DohertyBob, Bob Doherty. 2018. Expanding
the boundaries of brand communities: the case of Fairtrade Towns. European Journal of Marketing 52:3/4,
758-782. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
18. Lorne Kriwoken, Anne Hardy. 2018. Neo-tribes and Antarctic expedition cruise ship tourists. Annals of
Leisure Research 21:2, 161-177. [Crossref]
19. Kevin Filo, Daniel Lock, Emma Sherry, Hung Quang Huynh. 2018. ‘You belonged to something’:
exploring how fundraising teams add to the social leverage of events. European Sport Management Quarterly
18:2, 216-236. [Crossref]
20. TorresEdwin N., Edwin N. Torres, LugosiPeter, Peter Lugosi, OrlowskiMarissa, Marissa Orlowski,
RonzoniGiulio, Giulio Ronzoni. 2018. Consumer-led experience customization: a socio-spatial approach.
Journal of Service Management 29:2, 206-229. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
21. Vella Verónica Somoza Sánchez, Davide Giacalone, René Chester Goduscheit. 2018. Digital anthropology
as method for lead user identification from unstructured big data. Creativity and Innovation Management
27:1, 32-41. [Crossref]
22. Kristian Roed Nielsen. 2018. Crowdfunding through a partial organization lens - The co-dependent
organization. European Management Journal . [Crossref]
23. Elina Närvänen, Pauliina Koivisto, Hannu Kuusela. 2018. Managing consumption communities. Journal
of Strategic Marketing 40, 1-17. [Crossref]
24. Alina Geiger, Chris Horbel, Claas Christian Germelmann. 2018. “Give and take”: how notions of sharing
and context determine free peer-to-peer accommodation decisions. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing
35:1, 5-15. [Crossref]
25. Lena Jingen Liang, HS Chris Choi, Marion Joppe. 2018. Understanding repurchase intention of Airbnb
consumers: perceived authenticity, electronic word-of-mouth, and price sensitivity. Journal of Travel &
Tourism Marketing 35:1, 73-89. [Crossref]
26. Simon Bridge, Ken O’Neill. What Might Work? 341-356. [Crossref]
27. Shenja van der Graaf. Game Changer 65-90. [Crossref]
28. Ingrid M. O’Brien, Wade Jarvis, Geoffrey Soutar, Robyn Ouschan. Co-creating a CSR Strategy with
Customers to Deliver Greater Value 89-107. [Crossref]
29. Anne Hardy, Andy Bennett, Brady Robards. Introducing Contemporary Neo-Tribes 1-14. [Crossref]
30. Elias le Grand. Rethinking Neo-Tribes: Ritual, Social Differentiation and Symbolic Boundaries in
‘Alternative’ Food Practice 17-31. [Crossref]
31. Giovanna Bertella. Vegetarian for a Day or Two 33-49. [Crossref]
32. Zuyi Lv, Junxi Qian. A Coffeehouse Neo-Tribe in the Making: Exploring a Fluid Cultural Public Space
in Post-Reform Chinese Urbanism 51-67. [Crossref]
33. Oskaras Vorobjovas-Pinta. ‘It’s Been Nice, but We’re Going Back to Our Lives’: Neo-Tribalism and the
Role of Space in a Gay Resort 71-87. [Crossref]
34. Lan Xue, Jie Gao, Deborah Kerstetter. Neo-Tribalism Outside the Stadium: A Fluid Community of
Tailgaters 105-117. [Crossref]
35. Harald Dolles, Mark R. Dibben, Anne Hardy. Motorcycle Racing and Neo-Tribes at the Isle of Man
119-134. [Crossref]
36. Brady Robards. Belonging and Neo-Tribalism on Social Media Site Reddit 187-206. [Crossref]
37. Matt Hart. #Topless Tuesdays and #Wet Wednesdays: Digitally Mediated Neo-Tribalism and NSFW
Selfies on Tumblr 207-219. [Crossref]
38. Zauyani Zainal Mohamed Alias, Nor’Ain Othman. Visitors Experiences, Expectations and Satisfaction in
Trade Shows and Exhibitions 37-47. [Crossref]
39. Line Schmeltz, Anna Karina Kjeldsen. 2018. Co-creating polyphony or cacophony? A case study of a
public organization’s brand co-creation process and the challenge of orchestrating multiple internal voices.
Journal of Brand Management . [Crossref]
40. Annette Popp Tower, Charles H. Noble. 2017. Exploring and extending a collective open business model.
AMS Review 20. . [Crossref]
41. Denise Lawungkurr Goodfellow, Anne Hardy, Sara Dolnicar. Communication-Regulated Social Systems .
[Crossref]
42. O’ReillyDaragh, Daragh O’Reilly, DohertyKathy, Kathy Doherty, CarnegieElizabeth, Elizabeth Carnegie,
LarsenGretchen, Gretchen Larsen. 2017. Cultural memory and the heritagisation of a music consumption
community. Arts and the Market 7:2, 174-190. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
43. LiuJiangmeng Helen, Jiangmeng Helen Liu, NorthMichael, Michael North, LiCong, Cong Li. 2017.
Relationship building through reputation and tribalism on companies’ Facebook pages. Internet Research
27:5, 1149-1169. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
44. Maurizio Catulli, Matthew Cook, Stephen Potter. 2017. Product Service Systems Users and Harley
Davidson Riders: The Importance of Consumer Identity in the Diffusion of Sustainable Consumption
Solutions. Journal of Industrial Ecology 21:5, 1370-1379. [Crossref]
45. Ashleigh-Jane Thompson, Andrew J. Martin, Sarah Gee, Andrea N. Geurin. 2017. Fans’ Perceptions of
Professional Tennis Events’ Social Media Presence. Communication & Sport 5:5, 579-603. [Crossref]
46. AgrawalRicha, Richa Agrawal, RamachandranGiridhar, Giridhar Ramachandran. 2017. Flocking together
– benefits and costs of small group consumption community participation. European Journal of Marketing
51:9/10, 1713-1738. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
47. SierraJeremy J., Jeremy J. Sierra, TauteHarry A., Harry A. Taute, LeeByung-Kwan, Byung-Kwan Lee.
2017. A brand foci model to explain achievement needs: a contradictory explanation. Asia Pacific Journal
of Marketing and Logistics 29:4, 743-758. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
48. Magdalena Grębosz-Krawczyk, Jean-Marc Pointet. 2017. Co-branding Strategy as a Source of Innovation
on International Market. Journal of Intercultural Management 9:3. . [Crossref]
49. Thiago Assunção de Moraes, Nelsio Rodrigues de Abreu. 2017. TRIBOS DE CONSUMO:
REPRESENTAÇÕES SOCIAIS EM UMA COMUNIDADE VIRTUAL DE MARCA. Organizações &
Sociedade 24:81, 325-342. [Crossref]
50. Niklas Woermann. 2017. Back to the roots! Methodological situationalism and the postmodern lesson for
studying tribes, practices, and assemblages. Marketing Theory 17:2, 149-163. [Crossref]
51. TauteHarry A., Harry A. Taute, SierraJeremy J., Jeremy J. Sierra, CarterLarry L., Larry L. Carter,
MaherAmro A., Amro A. Maher. 2017. A sequential process of brand tribalism, brand pride and brand
attitude to explain purchase intention: a cross-continent replication study. Journal of Product & Brand
Management 26:3, 239-250. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
52. ParganasPetros, Petros Parganas, AnagnostopoulosChristos, Christos Anagnostopoulos, ChadwickSimon,
Simon Chadwick. 2017. Effects of social media interactions on brand associations. International Journal of
Sports Marketing and Sponsorship 18:2, 149-165. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
53. PathakXema, Xema Pathak, Pathak-ShelatManisha, Manisha Pathak-Shelat. 2017. Sentiment analysis of
virtual brand communities for effective tribal marketing. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing 11:1,
54. Anastasia Seregina, John W. Schouten. 2017. Resolving identity ambiguity through transcending fandom.
Consumption Markets & Culture 20:2, 107-130. [Crossref]
55. Dannie Kjeldgaard, Søren Askegaard, Jannick Ørnstedt Rasmussen, Per Østergaard. 2017. Consumers’
collective action in market system dynamics. Marketing Theory 17:1, 51-70. [Crossref]
56. Gandolfo Dominici, Maurice Yolles, Francesco Caputo. 2017. Decoding the Dynamics of Value Cocreation
in Consumer Tribes: An Agency Theory Approach. Cybernetics and Systems 48:2, 84-101. [Crossref]
57. Cherniece J. Plume, Yogesh K. Dwivedi, Emma L. Slade. Culture 79-92. [Crossref]
58. Cherniece J. Plume, Yogesh K. Dwivedi, Emma L. Slade. Online Brand Communities 41-78. [Crossref]
59. Anne Hardy. Community and Connection: Exploring Non-monetary Aspects of the Collaborative
Economy Through Recreation Vehicle Use 255-270. [Crossref]
60. Iain Black, Cleopatra Veloutsou. 2017. Working consumers: Co-creation of brand identity, consumer
identity and brand community identity. Journal of Business Research 70, 416-429. [Crossref]
61. John M. T. Balmer. Explicating Corporate Brands and Their Management: Reflections and Directions
from 1995 22-46. [Crossref]
62. Jennifer A. Yule, Julie S. Tinson. 2017. Youth and the sociability of “Vaping”. Journal of Consumer
Behaviour 16:1, 3-14. [Crossref]
63. Francesca Costanza. Social Media Marketing and Value Co-creation: A Dynamic Performance Management
Perspective 131-143. [Crossref]
64. Robert Kozinets. 2017. Brand Networks as the Interplay of Identities, Selves, and Turtles: Commentary on
“Interplay between intended brand identity and identities in a Nike related brand community: Co-existing
synergies and tensions in a nested system”. Journal of Business Research 70, 441-442. [Crossref]
65. Sandra Maria Correia Loureiro, Hans Ruediger Kaufmann, Len Tiu Wright. 2016. Luxury values as drivers
for affective commitment: The case of luxury car tribes. Cogent Business & Management 3:1, 1171192.
[Crossref]
66. Bernardo Figueiredo, Daiane Scaraboto. 2016. The Systemic Creation of Value Through Circulation in
Collaborative Consumer Networks. Journal of Consumer Research 43:4, 509-533. [Crossref]
67. Maria Teresa Cuomo, Debora Tortora, Giuseppe Festa, Alex Giordano, Gerardino Metallo. 2016.
Exploring Consumer Insights in Wine Marketing: An Ethnographic Research on #Winelovers. Psychology
& Marketing 33:12, 1082-1090. [Crossref]
68. Debbie Harrison, Hans Kjellberg. 2016. How users shape markets. Marketing Theory 16:4, 445-468.
[Crossref]
69. Gandolfo Dominici, Maurice Yolles. 2016. Decoding the XXI Century’s Marketing Shift: An Agency
Theory Framework. Systems 4:4, 35. [Crossref]
70. Dante Contreras, Gregory Elacqua, Matías Martinez, Álvaro Miranda. 2016. Bullying, identity and
school performance: Evidence from Chile. International Journal of Educational Development 51, 147-162.
[Crossref]
71. Amber L. Stephenson, David B. Yerger. 2016. How Pretrial Expectations and Anticipated Obstacles Impact
University Brand Identification. Journal of Promotion Management 22:6, 853-873. [Crossref]
72. ###, Byunghwa Yang. 2016. The Moderated Mediation Effects of Branded App’s Experience and
Emotional Bond on the Brand Loyalty. The Korean Journal of Consumer and Advertising Psychology 17:4,
711-733. [Crossref]
73. Van WinkleChristine M., Christine M. Van Winkle, BueddefeldJill N.H., Jill N.H. Bueddefeld. 2016.
Service-dominant logic and the festival experience. International Journal of Event and Festival Management
7:3, 237-254. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
74. FisherRon, Ron Fisher, FrancisMark, Mark Francis, ThomasAndrew, Andrew Thomas, BurgessKevin,
Kevin Burgess, MutterKatherine, Katherine Mutter. 2016. Conceptions of value as family resemblances.
Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 19:4, 378-394. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
75. Bernard Paranque. An Alternative to Shareholder Value Creation: Subverting the Domination of Capitalist
Exchanges through the Production of Uses and Common Pool Resources Management 17-87. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF] [PDF]
76. Sophie Esmann Andersen, Trine Susanne Johansen. 2016. Cause-related marketing 2.0: Connection,
collaboration and commitment. Journal of Marketing Communications 22:5, 524-543. [Crossref]
77. Dianne Dean, Ramon E. Arroyo-Gamez, Khanyapuss Punjaisri, Christopher Pich. 2016. Internal brand
co-creation: The experiential brand meaning cycle in higher education. Journal of Business Research 69:8,
3041-3048. [Crossref]
78. Lenita Davis, Melissa Markley Rountree, Jullet A. Davis. 2016. Global Cause Awareness: Tracking
Awareness Through Electronic Word of Mouth. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing 28:3,
252-272. [Crossref]
79. Stephen R. O’Sullivan. 2016. The branded carnival: the dark magic of consumer excitement. Journal of
Marketing Management 32:9-10, 1033-1058. [Crossref]
80. Daniel Krier, William J. Swart. 2016. Trophies of Surplus Enjoyment. Critical Sociology 42:3, 371-392.
[Crossref]
81. Stuart J. Barnes, Jan Mattsson. 2016. Building tribal communities in the collaborative economy: an
innovation framework. Prometheus 34:2, 95-113. [Crossref]
82. Bastian Popp, Herbert Woratschek. 2016. Introducing branded communities in sport for building strong
brand relations in social media. Sport Management Review 19:2, 183-197. [Crossref]
83. May Aung, Ou Sha. 2016. Clothing consumption culture of a neo-tribe. Journal of Fashion Marketing and
Management: An International Journal 20:1, 34-53. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
84. Jake Hobbs, Georgiana Grigore, Mike Molesworth. 2016. Success in the management of crowdfunding
projects in the creative industries. Internet Research 26:1, 146-166. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
85. Adam Arvidsson, Alessandro Caliandro. 2016. Brand Public. Journal of Consumer Research 42:5, 727-748.
[Crossref]
86. Jeremy J. Sierra, Vishag A. Badrinarayanan, Harry A. Taute. 2016. Explaining behavior in brand
communities: A sequential model of attachment, tribalism, and self-esteem. Computers in Human Behavior
55, 626-632. [Crossref]
87. Christopher Pich, Dianne Dean, Khanyapuss Punjaisri. 2016. Political brand identity: An examination
of the complexities of Conservative brand and internal market engagement during the 2010 UK General
Election campaign. Journal of Marketing Communications 22:1, 100-117. [Crossref]
88. Francisco J. Martínez-López, Rafael Anaya-Sánchez, Rocio Aguilar-Illescas, Sebastián Molinillo.
Conceptual Approach to Community, Virtual Community and Online Brand Community 107-124.
[Crossref]
89. Benedetta Cappellini, Dorothy Ai-wan Yen. 2016. A space of one’s own: spatial and identity liminality in
an online community of mothers. Journal of Marketing Management 32:13-14, 1260. [Crossref]
90. Klaus-Peter Wiedmann. Corporate Identity als strategisches Orientierungskonzept der Kommunikation
153-184. [Crossref]
91. Sijun Wang. Niche Brand 1-4. [Crossref]
92. Marcin Wieczerzycki. 2016. The Wisdom of e-crowds: Can Masses Create Value?. International Journal
of Management and Economics 51:1. . [Crossref]
93. Bhavannarayana Kandala, Sudha Vemaraju. Flexible Distribution Strategies in Network Marketing
Companies 51-70. [Crossref]
94. Bastian Popp. Brand Communities: Grundidee, Konzept und empirische Befunde 1-15. [Crossref]
95. Daniel Krier, William J. Swart. 2016. The Commodification of Spectacle: Spectators, Sponsors and the
Outlaw Biker Diegesis at Sturgis. Critical Sociology 42:1, 11-32. [Crossref]
96. Laura Di Ferrante, Walter Giordano, Sergio Pizziconi. Dissociative Identities: A Multi-modal Discourse
Analysis of TV Commercials of Italian Products in Italy and in the USA 246-271. [Crossref]
97. Elena Radicchi, Michele Mozzachiodi. 2016. Social Talent Scouting: A New Opportunity for the
Identification of Football Players?. Physical Culture and Sport. Studies and Research 70:1. . [Crossref]
98. Michael John Healy, Michael B. Beverland. 2016. Being sub-culturally authentic and acceptable to
the mainstream: Civilizing practices and self-authentication. Journal of Business Research 69:1, 224-233.
[Crossref]
99. Christina Goulding, Michael Saren. 2016. Transformation, transcendence, and temporality in theatrical
consumption. Journal of Business Research 69:1, 216-223. [Crossref]
100. Henna Syrjälä. 2016. Turning point of transformation: Consumer communities, identity projects and
becoming a serious dog hobbyist. Journal of Business Research 69:1, 177-190. [Crossref]
101. J. McKeown. The acceptance of complementary therapies amongst equine communities and what therapists
need to know 133-142. [Crossref]
102. Verena E. Stoeckl, Marius K. Luedicke. 2015. Doing well while doing good? An integrative review of
marketing criticism and response. Journal of Business Research 68:12, 2452-2463. [Crossref]
103. Clinton D. Lanier, C. Scott Rader. 2015. Consumption experience. Marketing Theory 15:4, 487-508.
[Crossref]
104. Markus Holzweber, Jan Mattsson, Craig Standing. 2015. Entrepreneurial business development through
building tribes. Journal of Strategic Marketing 23:7, 563-578. [Crossref]
105. Daniel Krier, William J. Swart. How Legends Become Brands: The Culture Industry in the Second
Enclosure Movement 243-266. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF]
106. Tracy Harwood, Tony Garry, Mike Uwins. 2015. Machinima: Extending brand reach. Journal of Consumer
Behaviour 14:6, 378-388. [Crossref]
107. Nicoletta Buratti, Francesco Derchi, Giorgia Profumo. 2015. The blurred boundary between empowered
and working consumers: insights from the winner taco case. MERCATI E COMPETITIVITÀ :4,
133-156. [Crossref]
108. . Understanding Why They Buy 85-109. [Crossref]
109. Henna Syrjälä, Hanna Leipämaa-Leskinen, Pirjo Laaksonen. 2015. Social needs in Finnish young adults’
mundane consumption. Young Consumers 16:3, 301-315. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
110. Maribel Carvalho Suarez, Flavia Luzia Oliveira da Cunha Galindo, Vaclav Soukup Filho, Rafael Machado.
2015. Constituição de uma Comunidade Virtual de Marca no Lançamento de Novo Produto. Revista de
Administração Contemporânea 19:spe2, 117-136. [Crossref]
111. Pernille Rydén, Torsten Ringberg, Ricky Wilke. 2015. How Managers' Shared Mental Models of Business–
Customer Interactions Create Different Sensemaking of Social Media. Journal of Interactive Marketing 31,
1-16. [Crossref]
112. Szilvia Gyimóthy, Christine Lundberg, Kristina N. Lindström, Maria Lexhagen, Mia Larson. Popculture
Tourism 13-26. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF]
113. . References 177-228. [Citation] [Enhanced Abstract] [PDF] [PDF]
114. Lorna Ruane, Elaine Wallace. 2015. Brand tribalism and self-expressive brands: social influences and brand
outcomes. Journal of Product & Brand Management 24:4, 333-348. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
115. Yonggui Wang, Shuang (Sara) Ma, Dahui Li. 2015. Customer participation in virtual brand communities:
The self-construal perspective. Information & Management 52:5, 577-587. [Crossref]
116. Ken Sumida, Ben Wooliscroft, Michael Sam. 2015. Sports fans and psychological ownership: the team as
a cultural institution. Asia Pacific Journal of Sport and Social Science 4:2, 144-166. [Crossref]
117. Alev P. Kuruoğlu, Güliz Ger. 2015. An emotional economy of mundane objects. Consumption Markets &
Culture 18:3, 209-238. [Crossref]
118. Isabelle Aoun, Laurent Tournois. 2015. Building holistic brands: an exploratory study of Halal cosmetics.
Journal of Islamic Marketing 6:1, 109-132. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
119. Vassiliki Grougiou, George P. Moschis. 2015. Antecedents of young adults' materialistic values. Journal of
Consumer Behaviour 14:2, 115-126. [Crossref]
120. Stephen R. O'Sullivan. 2015. The Market Maven Crowd: Collaborative Risk-Aversion and Enhanced
Consumption Context Control in an Illicit Market. Psychology & Marketing 32:3, 285-302. [Crossref]
121. Agnieszka Izabela Baruk, Anna Iwanicka. 2015. Polish final purchasers’ expectations towards the features of
dairy product packaging in the context of buying decisions. British Food Journal 117:1, 178-194. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
122. Dianne Dean, Robin Croft, Christopher Pich. 2015. Toward a Conceptual Framework of Emotional
Relationship Marketing: An Examination of Two UK Political Parties. Journal of Political Marketing
14:1-2, 19-34. [Crossref]
123. Robert Busby, Sue Cronshaw. 2015. Political Branding: The Tea Party and Its Use of Participation
Branding. Journal of Political Marketing 14:1-2, 96-110. [Crossref]
124. K. Collins. 2015. Is there a role for marketing in community development?. Community Development
Journal 50:1, 153-167. [Crossref]
125. N. Anido Freire. 2014. When luxury advertising adds the identitary values of luxury: A semiotic analysis.
Journal of Business Research 67:12, 2666-2675. [Crossref]
126. Per Østergaard, Jeppe Trolle Linnet, Lars Pynt Andersen, Dannie Kjeldgaard, Stine Bjerregaard, Henri
Weijo, Diane M. Martin, John W. Schouten, Jacob Östberg. Nordic Consumer Culture: Context and
Concept 245-257. [Citation] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF]
127. Vishag A. Badrinarayanan, Jeremy J. Sierra, Harry A. Taute. 2014. Determinants and Outcomes of
Online Brand Tribalism: Exploring Communities of Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games
(MMORPGs). Psychology & Marketing 31:10, 853-870. [Crossref]
128. Lisa O’Malley. 2014. Relational marketing: development, debates and directions. Journal of Marketing
Management 30:11-12, 1220-1238. [Crossref]
129. David E. Williams. 2014. Integrating the conceptual domains of social commerce: a meta-theoretical
perspective. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research 24:4, 361-410.
[Crossref]
130. Nicolas Chanavat, Guillaume Bodet. 2014. Experiential marketing in sport spectatorship services: a
customer perspective. European Sport Management Quarterly 14:4, 323-344. [Crossref]
131. Hamida Skandrani, Mariem Kamoun. Hospitality Meanings and Consequences Among Hotels Employees
and Guests 147-156. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF]
132. Ashok Kumar Wahi, Yajulu Medury, Rajnish Kumar Misra. 2014. Social Media. International Journal of
Service Science, Management, Engineering, and Technology 5:3, 1-15. [Crossref]
133. Silvia Ranfagni, Simone Guercini. 2014. On the trail of supply side authenticity: Paradoxes and
compromises emerging from an action research. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 13:3, 176-187. [Crossref]
134. Amber M. Epp, Hope Jensen Schau, Linda L. Price. 2014. The Role of Brands and Mediating
Technologies in Assembling Long-Distance Family Practices. Journal of Marketing 78:3, 81-101.
[Crossref]
135. Grace K. Dagher, Omar Itani. 2014. Factors influencing green purchasing behaviour: Empirical evidence
from the Lebanese consumers. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 13:3, 188-195. [Crossref]
136. Robert Caruana, Sarah Glozer, Andrew Crane, Scott McCabe. 2014. Tourists’ accounts of responsible
tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 46, 115-129. [Crossref]
137. Sheau Fen Crystal Yap, Christina Kwai Choi Lee. 2014. Leveraging the power of online social networks:
a contingency approach. Marketing Intelligence & Planning 32:3, 345-374. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
138. Bernard Paranque. 2014. Private property and collective action: co-operation instead of competition.
EuroMed Journal of Business 9:1, 37-59. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
139. Anjala Selena Krishen, Robyn Raschke, Pushkin Kachroo, Michael LaTour, Pratik Verma. 2014. Promote
me or protect us? The framing of policy for collective good. European Journal of Marketing 48:3/4, 742-760.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
140. McCarthy Jeff, Rowley Jennifer, Jane Ashworth Catherine, Pioch Elke. 2014. Managing brand presence
through social media: the case of UK football clubs. Internet Research 24:2, 181-204. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
141. Harry A. Taute, Jeremy Sierra. 2014. Brand tribalism: an anthropological perspective. Journal of Product
& Brand Management 23:1, 2-15. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
142. David P. Hedlund. 2014. Creating value through membership and participation in sport fan consumption
communities. European Sport Management Quarterly 14:1, 50-71. [Crossref]
143. Christel de Lassus, N. Anido Freire. 2014. Access to the luxury brand myth in pop-up stores: A
netnographic and semiotic analysis. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 21:1, 61-68. [Crossref]
144. Balwant Samra, Anna Wos. 2014. Consumer in Sports: Fan typology analysis. Journal of Intercultural
Management 6:4-1. . [Crossref]
145. Ed Vos, Richard J. Varey. Social Networks and Marketing Happiness? The Potential Role of Marketing
in an Electronic World 244-256. [Crossref]
146. Anna Fyrberg-Yngfalk, Bernard Cova, Stefano Pace, Per Skålén. Control and Power in Online Consumer
Tribes: The Role of Confessions 325-350. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF]
147. Gandolfo Dominici, Gianpaolo Basile, Federica Palumbo. 2013. Viable Systems Approach and Consumer
Culture Theory: A Conceptual Framework. Journal of Organisational Transformation & Social Change
10:3, 262-285. [Crossref]
148. Sylvie E. Rolland, Guy Parmentier. 2013. The Benefit of Social Media: Bulletin Board Focus Groups as a
Tool for Co-creation. International Journal of Market Research 55:6, 809-827. [Crossref]
149. Veronika Schwarzenberger, Kenneth Hyde. 2013. The role of sports brands in niche sports subcultures.
International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship 15:1, 35-51. [Abstract] [PDF]
150. Anette Therkelsen, Bodil Stilling Blichfeldt, Jane Chor, Nina Ballegaard. 2013. ‘I am very straight in my
gay life’. Journal of Vacation Marketing 19:4, 317-327. [Crossref]
151. Jeff Jianfeng Wang, Xin Zhao, Julie Juan Li. 2013. Group Buying: A Strategic Form of Consumer
Collective. Journal of Retailing 89:3, 338-351. [Crossref]
152. Richard Mitchell, Karise Hutchinson, Barry Quinn. 2013. Brand management in small and medium-
sized (SME) retailers: A future research agenda. Journal of Marketing Management 29:11-12, 1367-1393.
[Crossref]
153. Karl Spracklen, Stephen Henderson. 2013. “Oh! What a tangled web we weave”: Englishness,
communicative leisure, identity work and the cultural web of the English folk morris dance scene. Leisure/
Loisir 37:3, 233-249. [Crossref]
154. . References 263-311. [Citation] [Enhanced Abstract] [PDF] [PDF]
155. Maria Lexhagen, Mia Larson, Christine Lundberg. The Virtual Fan(G) Community: Social Media and
Pop Culture Tourism 133-157. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF]
156. Elfriede Penz, Rudolf R. Sinkovics. 2013. Triangulating consumers' perceptions of payment systems by
using social representations theory: A multi-method approach. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 12:4,
293-306. [Crossref]
157. Elina Närvänen, Elina Kartastenpää, Hannu Kuusela. 2013. Online lifestyle consumption community
dynamics: A practice-based analysis. Journal of Consumer Behaviour n/a-n/a. [Crossref]
158. Anna Fyrberg Yngfalk. 2013. ‘It’s not us, it’s them!’ – Rethinking value co-creation among multiple actors.
Journal of Marketing Management 29:9-10, 1163-1181. [Crossref]
159. Luke Greenacre, Lynne Freeman, Melissa Donald. 2013. Contrasting social network and tribal theories:
An applied perspective. Journal of Business Research 66:7, 948-954. [Crossref]
160. Julien Cayla, Eric Arnould. 2013. Ethnographic Stories for Market Learning. Journal of Marketing 77:4,
1-16. [Crossref]
161. Ryan Charmley, Tony Garry, Paul W Ballantine. 2013. The inauthentic other: Social comparison
theory and brand avoidance within consumer sub-cultures. Journal of Brand Management 20:6, 458-472.
[Crossref]
162. Anne-Marie Lebrun, Lionel Souchet, Patrick Bouchet. 2013. Social representations and brand positioning
in the sporting goods market. European Sport Management Quarterly 13:3, 358-379. [Crossref]
163. Stefânia Ordovás de Almeida, José Afonso Mazzon, Utpal Dholakia, Hugo Müller Neto. 2013. Participant
diversity and expressive freedom in firm-managed and customer-managed brand communities. BAR -
Brazilian Administration Review 10:2, 195-218. [Crossref]
164. Anne Hardy, Ulrike Gretzel, Dallas Hanson. 2013. Travelling neo-tribes: conceptualising recreational
vehicle users. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change 11:1-2, 48-60. [Crossref]
165. Paul Hewer, Douglas Brownlie, Finola Kerrigan. 2013. ‘The exploding plastic inevitable’: ‘Branding being’,
brand Warhol & the factory years. Scandinavian Journal of Management 29:2, 184-193. [Crossref]
166. Craig J Thompson, Eric Arnould, Markus Giesler. 2013. Discursivity, difference, and disruption.
Marketing Theory 13:2, 149-174. [Crossref]
167. Christina Goulding, Avi Shankar, Robin Canniford. 2013. Learning to be tribal: facilitating the formation
of consumer tribes. European Journal of Marketing 47:5/6, 813-832. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
168. Natalia Vila‐López, MaCarmen Rodríguez‐Molina. 2013. Event‐brand transfer in an entertainment
service: experiential marketing. Industrial Management & Data Systems 113:5, 712-731. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
169. Guillaume Bodet. 2013. Olympic marketing. European Sport Management Quarterly 13:2, 264-267.
[Crossref]
170. Johanna Moisander, Saara Könkkölä, Pikka-Maaria Laine. 2013. Consumer workers as immaterial labour
in the converging media markets: three value-creation practices. International Journal of Consumer Studies
37:2, 222-227. [Crossref]
171. Tandy Chalmers Thomas, Linda L. Price, Hope Jensen Schau. 2013. When Differences Unite: Resource
Dependence in Heterogeneous Consumption Communities. Journal of Consumer Research 39:5, 1010-1033.
[Crossref]
172. Guendalina Graffigna. Current research frontiers on corporate communication: the heuristic value of online
qualitative research 481-505. [Crossref]
173. Bernard Cova, Tae Youn Kim. Luxury Consumer Tribes In Asia: Insights From South Korea 138-154.
[Crossref]
174. Giordano Koch, Katja Hutter, Peter Decarli, Dennis Hilgers, Johann Fuller. Identifying Participants' Roles
in Open Government Platforms and Its Impact on Community Growth 1900-1910. [Crossref]
175. Jill Avery. 2012. Defending the markers of masculinity: Consumer resistance to brand gender-bending.
International Journal of Research in Marketing 29:4, 322-336. [Crossref]
176. Elaine Wallace, Isabel Buil, Leslie de Chernatony. 2012. Facebook ‘friendship’ and brand advocacy. Journal
of Brand Management 20:2, 128-146. [Crossref]
177. Chiara Valentini, Dean Kruckeberg, Kenneth Starck. 2012. Public relations and community: A persistent
covenant. Public Relations Review 38:5, 873-879. [Crossref]
178. Ana Pinto de Lima, Carlos Brito. 2012. An Examination of the Tribal Community Dimensions of ICT
Users. Journal of Internet Commerce 11:4, 291-308. [Crossref]
179. Mina Seraj. 2012. We Create, We Connect, We Respect, Therefore We Are: Intellectual, Social, and
Cultural Value in Online Communities. Journal of Interactive Marketing 26:4, 209-222. [Crossref]
180. Hye‐Kyung Lee. 2012. Cultural consumers as “new cultural intermediaries”: manga scanlators. Arts
Marketing: An International Journal 2:2, 131-143. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
181. Ian Combe. 2012. “Marketing and flexibility”: debates past, present and future. European Journal of
Marketing 46:10, 1257-1267. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
182. Osmud Rahman, Liu Wing-Sun, Brittany Hei-man Cheung. 2012. “Cosplay”: Imaginative Self and
Performing Identity. Fashion Theory 16:3, 317-341. [Crossref]
183. Daragh O’Reilly. 2012. Maffesoli and consumer tribes. Marketing Theory 12:3, 341-347. [Crossref]
184. Kevina Cody. 2012. “BeTween two worlds”: critically exploring marketing segmentation and liminal
consumers. Young Consumers 13:3, 284-302. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
185. Scott K. Radford, Peter H. Bloch. 2012. Grief, commiseration, and consumption following the death of
a celebrity. Journal of Consumer Culture 12:2, 137-155. [Crossref]
186. Anne-Marie Hede, Pamm Kellett. 2012. Building online brand communities. Journal of Vacation Marketing
18:3, 239-250. [Crossref]
187. Mark S. Rosenbaum, Gianfranco Walsh, Richard Wozniak. 2012. Family allowances as reverse retail
discrimination. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management 40:5, 342-359. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
188. Alessandra Mazzei, Silvia Ravazzani. 2012. Leveraging variety for creativity, dialogue and competition.
Journal of Communication Management 16:1, 59-76. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
189. Enrico Baraldi, Espen Gressetvold, Debbie Harrison. 2012. Resource interaction in inter-organizational
networks: Foundations, comparison, and a research agenda. Journal of Business Research 65:2, 266-276.
[Crossref]
190. Michael Gonin, Guido Palazzo, Ulrich Hoffrage. 2012. Neither bad apple nor bad barrel: how the societal
context impacts unethical behavior in organizations. Business Ethics: A European Review 21:1, 31-46.
[Crossref]
191. Johann Fueller, Roland Schroll, Severin Dennhardt, Katja Hutter. Social Brand Value and the Value
Enhancing Role of Social Media Relationships for Brands 3218-3227. [Crossref]
192. Robin Canniford. 2011. How to manage consumer tribes. Journal of Strategic Marketing 19:7, 591-606.
[Crossref]
193. Iryna Pentina, Clinton Amos. 2011. The Freegan phenomenon: anti‐consumption or consumer resistance?.
European Journal of Marketing 45:11/12, 1768-1778. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

194. Karen V. Fernandez, Amanda J. Brittain, Sandra D. Bennett. 2011. “Doing the duck”: negotiating the
resistant‐consumer identity. European Journal of Marketing 45:11/12, 1779-1788. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
195. Stewart Barr, Gareth Shaw, Tim Coles. 2011. Times for (Un)sustainability? Challenges and opportunities
for developing behaviour change policy. A case-study of consumers at home and away. Global
Environmental Change 21:4, 1234-1244. [Crossref]
196. Leila El Kamel, Benny Rigaux-Bricmont. 2011. The Contributions of Postmodernism to the Analysis
of Virtual Worlds as a Consumption Experience. The Case of Second Life. Recherche et Applications en
Marketing (English Edition) 26:3, 71-92. [Crossref]
197. Siwarit Pongsakornrungsilp, Jonathan E. Schroeder. 2011. Understanding value co-creation in a co-
consuming brand community. Marketing Theory 11:3, 303-324. [Crossref]
198. Lydia Spenceley. 2011. Breaking the wall? Autoethnography and the transition from subject specialist to
professional educator in FE. Journal of Further and Higher Education 35:3, 409-421. [Crossref]
199. Stephen R. O'Sullivan, Brendan Richardson, Alan Collins. 2011. How brand communities emerge: The
Beamish conversion experience. Journal of Marketing Management 27:9-10, 891-912. [Crossref]
200. Stuart E. Levy, Donald Getz, Simon Hudson. 2011. A Field Experimental Investigation of Managerially
Facilitated Consumer-to-Consumer Interaction. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 28:6, 656-674.
[Crossref]
201. Andrea Fosfuri, Marco S. Giarratana, Esther Roca. 2011. Community-focused strategies. Strategic
Organization 9:3, 222-239. [Crossref]
202. Stefânia Ordovás de Almeida, José Afonso Mazzon, Utpal Dholakia, Hugo Fridolino Müller Neto. 2011. Os
efeitos da participação em comunidades virtuais de marca no comportamento do consumidor: proposição
e teste de um modelo teórico. Revista de Administração Contemporânea 15:3, 366-391. [Crossref]
203. Fiona Spotswood, Alan Tapp. 2011. Rethinking How to Tackle Binge Drinking Using Social Marketing:
A Neotribal Analysis. Social Marketing Quarterly 17:2, 76-91. [Crossref]
204. Kevina Cody, Katrina Lawlor. 2011. On the borderline: Exploring liminal consumption and the negotiation
of threshold selves. Marketing Theory 11:2, 207-228. [Crossref]
205. Peter Nuttall, Sally Arnold, Luke Carless, Lily Crockford, Katie Finnamore, Richard Frazier, Alicia Hill.
2011. Understanding music consumption through a tribal lens. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services
18:2, 152-159. [Crossref]
206. Patrick Bouchet, Guillaume Bodet, Iouri Bernache-Assollant, Faycel Kada. 2011. Segmenting sport
spectators: Construction and preliminary validation of the Sporting Event Experience Search (SEES) scale.
Sport Management Review 14:1, 42-53. [Crossref]
207. Cleo Mitchell, Brian C. Imrie. 2011. Consumer tribes: membership, consumption and building loyalty.
Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics 23:1, 39-56. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
208. Robin Canniford. A Typology of Consumption Communities 57-75. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF]
209. Carol Kelleher, Andrew Whalley, Anu Helkkula. Collaborative Value Co-Creation in Crowd-Sourced
Online Communities – Acknowledging and Resolving Competing Commercial and Communal
Orientations 1-18. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF]
210. Adam Weaver. 2011. The Fragmentation of Markets, Neo-Tribes, Nostalgia, and the Culture of Celebrity:
The Rise of Themed Cruises. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 18:1, 54-60. [Crossref]
211. Brigita Jurisic, António Azevedo. 2011. Building customer–brand relationships in the mobile
communications market: The role of brand tribalism and brand reputation. Journal of Brand Management
18:4-5, 349-366. [Crossref]
212. John M T Balmer. 2010. Explicating corporate brands and their management: Reflections and directions
from 1995. Journal of Brand Management 18:3, 180-196. [Crossref]
213. Luca M. Visconti, John F. Sherry, Stefania Borghini, Laurel Anderson. 2010. Street Art, Sweet Art?
Reclaiming the “Public” in Public Place. Journal of Consumer Research 37:3, 511-529. [Crossref]
214. Caroline Moraes, Isabelle Szmigin, Marylyn Carrigan. 2010. Living production‐engaged alternatives: An
examination of new consumption communities. Consumption Markets & Culture 13:3, 273-298. [Crossref]
215. Bernard Cova, Frédéric Prévot, Robert Spencer. 2010. Navigating between dyads and networks. Industrial
Marketing Management 39:6, 879-886. [Crossref]
216. Kathy Hamilton, Louise Hassan. 2010. Self‐concept, emotions and consumer coping. European Journal of
Marketing 44:7/8, 1101-1120. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
217. Terry O'Sullivan. 2010. Dangling conversations: Web-forum use by a symphony orchestra's audience
members. Journal of Marketing Management 26:7-8, 656-670. [Crossref]
218. Joonas Rokka. 2010. Netnographic inquiry and new translocal sites of the social. International Journal of
Consumer Studies 34:4, 381-387. [Crossref]
219. Margo Buchanan‐Oliver, Angela Cruz, Jonathan E. Schroeder. 2010. Shaping the body and technology.
European Journal of Marketing 44:5, 635-652. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
220. Nil Özçağlar-Toulouse, Bernard Cova. 2010. A History of French CCT: Pathways and Key Concepts.
Recherche et Applications en Marketing (English Edition) 25:2, 69-90. [Crossref]
221. Rémi Mencarelli, Séverine Marteaux, Mathilde Pulh. 2010. Museums, consumers, and on‐site experiences.
Marketing Intelligence & Planning 28:3, 330-348. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
222. Bernard Cova, Tim White. 2010. Counter-brand and alter-brand communities: the impact of Web 2.0 on
tribal marketing approaches. Journal of Marketing Management 26:3-4, 256-270. [Crossref]
223. Tracy Harwood, Tony Garry. 2010. ‘It's Mine!’ – Participation and ownership within virtual co-creation
environments. Journal of Marketing Management 26:3-4, 290-301. [Crossref]
224. Diego Rinallo, Stefania Borghini, Francesca Golfetto. 2010. Exploring visitor experiences at trade shows.
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 25:4, 249-258. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
225. Heli Holttinen. 2010. Social practices as units of value creation: theoretical underpinnings and
implications. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences 2:1, 95-112. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
226. Paul Hewer, Kathy Hamilton. 2010. On emotions and salsa: some thoughts on dancing to rethink
consumers. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 9:2, 113-125. [Crossref]
227. Risto Moisio, Mariam Beruchashvili. 2010. Questing for Well-Being at Weight Watchers: The Role of the
Spiritual-Therapeutic Model in a Support Group. Journal of Consumer Research 36:5, 857-875. [Crossref]
228. Marylouise Caldwell, Paul Henry, Ariell Alman. 2010. Constructing audio‐visual representations of
consumer archetypes. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 13:1, 84-96. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
229. Philippe Robert-Demontrond, Anne Joyeau, Christine Bougeard-Delfosse. 2010. La sphère marchande
comme outil de résistance à la mondialisation : le cas du marché des colas. Management international 14:4,
55. [Crossref]
230. Henna Konu, Tommi Laukkanen. 2010. Predictors of Tourists' Wellbeing Holiday Intentions in Finland.
Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 17:1, 144-149. [Crossref]

231. Alison Rieple, Jonathan Gander. 2009. Product development within a clustered environment: The case of
apparel design firms. Creative Industries Journal 2:3, 273-289. [Crossref]
232. Brigitte Nerlich, Brian Brown, Paul Crawford. 2009. Health, hygiene and biosecurity: Tribal knowledge
claims in the UK poultry industry. Health, Risk & Society 11:6, 561-577. [Crossref]
233. Sharon Schembri. 2009. Reframing brand experience: The experiential meaning of Harley–Davidson.
Journal of Business Research 62:12, 1299-1310. [Crossref]
234. Terry Newholm, Gillian C. Hopkinson. 2009. I just tend to wear what I like: contemporary consumption
and the paradoxical construction of individuality. Marketing Theory 9:4, 439-462. [Crossref]
235. Johanna Moisander, Anu Valtonen, Heidi Hirsto. 2009. Personal interviews in cultural consumer research
– post‐structuralist challenges. Consumption Markets & Culture 12:4, 329-348. [Crossref]
236. Jeffrey S. Podoshen, James M. Hunt. 2009. Animosity, collective memory, rumor and equity restoration:
Consumer reactions to the Holocaust. Consumption Markets & Culture 12:4, 301-327. [Crossref]
237. Hope Jensen Schau, Albert M Muñiz, Eric J Arnould. 2009. How Brand Community Practices Create
Value. Journal of Marketing 73:5, 30-51. [Crossref]
238. William E. Kilbourne, Michael J. Dorsch, Pierre McDonagh, Bertrand Urien, Andrea Prothero, Marko
Gr?nhagen, Michael Jay Polonsky, David Marshall, Janice Foley, Alan Bradshaw. 2009. The Institutional
Foundations of Materialism in Western Societies. Journal of Macromarketing 29:3, 259-278. [Crossref]
239. Bernard Cova, Daniele Dalli. 2009. Working consumers: the next step in marketing theory?. Marketing
Theory 9:3, 315-339. [Crossref]
240. Adrian Palmer, Nicole Koenig‐Lewis. 2009. An experiential, social network‐based approach to direct
marketing. Direct Marketing: An International Journal 3:3, 162-176. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
241. Tim Stone. 2009. Understanding consumption within a care home: an interpretation of George's
experiences of life and death. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 8:4, 166-178. [Crossref]
242. Michael T. Ewing. 2009. Integrated marketing communications measurement and evaluation. Journal of
Marketing Communications 15:2-3, 103-117. [Crossref]
243. John M. T. Balmer, Irene Thomson. 2009. The Shared Management and Ownership of Corporate Brands:
The Case of Hilton. Journal of General Management 34:4, 15-37. [Crossref]
244. Joonas Rokka, Johanna Moisander. 2009. Environmental dialogue in online communities: negotiating
ecological citizenship among global travellers. International Journal of Consumer Studies 33:2, 199-205.
[Crossref]
245. Adrian Payne, Kaj Storbacka, Pennie Frow, Simon Knox. 2009. Co-creating brands: Diagnosing and
designing the relationship experience. Journal of Business Research 62:3, 379-389. [Crossref]
246. Christina Goulding, Michael Saren. 2009. Performing identity: an analysis of gender expressions at the
Whitby goth festival. Consumption Markets & Culture 12:1, 27-46. [Crossref]
247. Cleopatra Veloutsou, Luiz Moutinho. 2009. Brand relationships through brand reputation and brand
tribalism. Journal of Business Research 62:3, 314-322. [Crossref]
248. Cleopatra Veloutsou. 2009. Brands as relationship facilitators in consumer markets. Marketing Theory 9:1,
127-130. [Crossref]
249. David N. Bibby. Brand image, equity, and sports sponsorship 21-99. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF]
250. Pedro Dionísio, Carmo Leal, Luiz Moutinho. 2008. A Phenomenological Research Study on Sports
Fandom in Portugal: A Comparative Study of Surfing and Football. Journal of Euromarketing 17:3-4,
233-253. [Crossref]
251. Ayşegül Özsomer, Selin Altaras. 2008. Global Brand Purchase Likelihood: A Critical Synthesis and an
Integrated Conceptual Framework. Journal of International Marketing 16:4, 1-28. [Crossref]
252. Christele Boulaire, Raoul Graf, Raja Guelmami. 2008. Online communities serving the consumer/
producer: observations from the study of a fantasy world. Direct Marketing: An International Journal 2:4,
253. John M.T. Balmer. 2008. Identity based views of the corporation. European Journal of Marketing 42:9/10,
254. Sharon Schembri. 2008. The paradox of a legend: A visual ethnography of Harley-Davidson in Australia.
Journal of Management & Organization 14:04, 386-398. [Crossref]
255. Lloyd C. Harris, Emmanuel Ogbonna. 2008. The Dynamics Underlying Service Firm—Customer
Relationships. Journal of Service Research 10:4, 382-399. [Crossref]
256. René Algesheimer, Călin Gurău. 2008. Introducing structuration theory in communal consumption
behavior research. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 11:2, 227-245. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
257. Stefano Pace. 2008. YouTube: an opportunity for consumer narrative analysis?. Qualitative Market
Research: An International Journal 11:2, 213-226. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
258. Deepak Chhabra. 2008. Positioning museums on an authenticity continuum. Annals of Tourism Research
35:2, 427-447. [Crossref]
259. Elfriede Penz, Barbara Stöttinger. 2008. Original brands and counterfeit brands—do they have anything
in common?. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 7:2, 146-163. [Crossref]
260. Eric J. Arnould. 2008. Service-dominant logic and resource theory. Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science 36:1, 21-24. [Crossref]
261. Pedro Dionísio, Carmo Leal, Luiz Moutinho. 2008. Fandom affiliation and tribal behaviour: a sports
marketing application. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 11:1, 17-39. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
262. 2008. Consumer Tribes. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 11:1, 113-115. [Citation]
[Full Text]
263. Bernard Cova, Robert Salle. 2007. The industrial/consumer marketing dichotomy revisited: a case of
outdated justification?. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 23:1, 3-11. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
264. Kai-Uwe Hellmann. 2007. „Bewegung im Markt“. Berliner Journal für Soziologie 17:4, 511-529. [Crossref]
265. Luiz Moutinho, Pedro Dionísio, Carmo Leal. 2007. Surf tribal behaviour: a sports marketing application.
Marketing Intelligence & Planning 25:7, 668-690. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
266. Kristian Möller, Arto Rajala. 2007. Rise of strategic nets — New modes of value creation. Industrial
Marketing Management 36:7, 895-908. [Crossref]
267. Hélène Cherrier. 2007. Ethical consumption practices: co-production of self-expression and social
recognition. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 6:5, 321-335. [Crossref]
268. Jonathan Deacon, Vincent J. Pascal, Robert G. Schwartz. 2007. Entrepreneurs and Marketing: A New
Look at Linguistic Interpretations. Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship 9:1, 24-39.
[Abstract] [PDF]
269. Rudi Meir, Don Scott. 2007. Tribalism: definition, identification and relevance to the marketing of
professional sports franchises. International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship 8:4, 43-59.
[Abstract] [PDF]
270. Lisa Penaloza. 2007. Mainstreet USA revisited. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 27:5/6,
271. Bernard Cova, Stefano Pace, David J. Park. 2007. Global brand communities across borders: the
Warhammer case. International Marketing Review 24:3, 313-329. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
272. Eric J. Arnould. 2007. Should Consumer Citizens Escape the Market?. The ANNALS of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science 611:1, 96-111. [Crossref]
273. Emily Boyle. 2007. A process model of brand cocreation: brand management and research implications.
Journal of Product & Brand Management 16:2, 122-131. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
274. Neil T. Higgs. 2007. Measuring and understanding the well-being of South Africans: Everyday quality of
life in South Africa. Social Indicators Research 81:2, 331-356. [Crossref]
275. Audrey Bonnemaizon, Bernard Cova, Marie-Claude Louyot. 2007. Relationship Marketing in 2015:.
European Management Journal 25:1, 50-59. [Crossref]
276. Petri Parvinen, Henrikki Tikkanen, Jaakko Aspara. 2007. Corporate strategic marketing: a new task for
top management. Business Strategy Series 8:2, 132-141. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
277. Eric J. Arnould. Service-Dominant Logic and Consumer Culture Theory: Natural Allies in an Emerging
Paradigm 57-76. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF]
278. Bernard Cova, Stefano Pace. 2006. Brand community of convenience products: new forms of customer
empowerment – the case “my Nutella The Community”. European Journal of Marketing 40:9/10,
279. René Algesheimer, Andreas Herrmann, Marcus Dimpfel. 2006. Die Wirkung von Brand Communities
auf die Markenloyalität — eine dynamische Analyse im Automobilmarkt. Journal of Business Economics
76:9, 933-958. [Crossref]
280. Lisa Peñaloza, Alladi Venkatesh. 2006. Further evolving the new dominant logic of marketing: from services
to the social construction of markets. Marketing Theory 6:3, 299-316. [Crossref]
281. Elfriede Penz. 2006. Researching the socio‐cultural context: putting social representations theory into
action. International Marketing Review 23:4, 418-437. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
282. Sharon Ponsonby‐Mccabe, Emily Boyle. 2006. Understanding brands as experiential spaces: axiological
implications for marketing strategists. Journal of Strategic Marketing 14:2, 175-189. [Crossref]
283. Zannie Giraud Voss, Véronique Cova. 2006. How sex differences in perceptions influence customer
satisfaction: a study of theatre audiences. Marketing Theory 6:2, 201-221. [Crossref]
284. Craig J. Thompson, Aric Rindfleisch, Zeynep Arsel. 2006. Emotional Branding and the Strategic Value
of the Doppelgänger Brand Image. Journal of Marketing 70:1, 50-64. [Crossref]
285. Catja Prykop, Mark Heitmann. 2006. Designing Mobile Brand Communities: Concept and Empirical
Illustration. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce 16:3, 301-323. [Crossref]
286. Frédéric Jallat, Elliot Wood. 2005. Exploring “deep” and “wide” stakeholder relations in service activity.
European Journal of Marketing 39:9/10, 1013-1024. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
287. Bernard Cova. 2005. Thinking of marketing in meridian terms. Marketing Theory 5:2, 205-214. [Crossref]
288. Kate Schofield, Ruth Ä. Schmidt. 2005. Fashion and clothing: the construction and communication of
gay identities. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management 33:4, 310-323. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
289. Tim McCreanor, Helen Moewaka Barnes, Mandi Gregory, Hector Kaiwai, Suaree Borell. 2005.
Consuming identities: Alcohol marketing and the commodification of youth experience. Addiction Research
& Theory 13:6, 579-590. [Crossref]
290. Antonella Carù, Bernard Cova, Stefano Pace. 2004. Project Success:. European Management Journal 22:5,
532-545. [Crossref]
291. Ifan D. H. Shepherd. 2004. Religious marketing: reflections from the other side of politics. Journal of
Public Affairs 4:3, 317S-341S. [Crossref]
292. Mark Oldridge. 2003. The Rise of the Stupid Network Effect. International Journal of Market Research
45:3, 1-15. [Crossref]
293. Mark Earls. 2003. Advertising to the Herd. International Journal of Market Research 45:3, 1-23. [Crossref]
294. Robert V. Kozinets. 2002. Can Consumers Escape the Market? Emancipatory Illuminations from Burning
Man. Journal of Consumer Research 29:1, 20-38. [Crossref]
295. . The Concept of Brand Identity 1-28. [Crossref]
296. Francesca Costanza. Social Media Marketing and Value Co-Creation 609-634. [Crossref]
297. David P. Hedlund, Rui Biscaia, Maria do Carmo Leal. Those Who Rarely Attend Alone 71-101. [Crossref]
298. Margo Buchanan-Oliver, Hope Jensen Schau. Brand Pathologies 185-200. [Crossref]
299. Chandra Sekhar Patro, Madhu Kishore Raghunath Kamakula. Emotional Branding as a Strategy in
Promoting Customer Loyalty 225-246. [Crossref]
300. Francesca Costanza. Social Media Marketing and Value Co-Creation 205-230. [Crossref]
301. Luisa Sturiale, Alessandro Scuderi. Interaction between the Emotional and Rational Aspects in Consumer
Buying Process for Typical Food Products of Italy 142-162. [Crossref]
302. Ozlem Hesapci-Sanaktekin, Yonca Aslanbay. The Networked Self 262-276. [Crossref]
303. Sonia Ferrari. Storytelling and Narrative Marketing in the Era of Social Media 1-15. [Crossref]
304. Sonia Ferrari. Experiential Tourist Products 211-230. [Crossref]
305. Madina Ansarin, Wilson Ozuem. Social Media and Online Brand Communities 1-27. [Crossref]
306. Mina Seraj, Aysegul Toker. Social Network Citizenship 84-102. [Crossref]
307. Mina Seraj, Aysegul Toker. Social Network Citizenship 339-357. [Crossref]
308. Gulnur Tumbat, Lisa M. Bennett. Consumption and Marketing in A 3D Virtual Space 374-392. [Crossref]
309. Kaan Varnali. Mobile Social Networks 248-258. [Crossref]
310. David P. Hedlund, Rui Biscaia, Maria do Carmo Leal. Those Who Rarely Attend Alone 386-416.
[Crossref]
311. Sonia Ferrari. Storytelling and Narrative Marketing in the Era of Social Media 206-220. [Crossref]
312. Margo Buchanan-Oliver, Hope Jensen Schau. Brand Pathologies 1052-1067. [Crossref]

Cova & Cova 2002

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cova & Cova 2002

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

European Journal of Marketing

Permanent link to this document:

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Tribal marketing The tribalisation

Introduction: a Latin view

tribal marketing as an appealing alternative to the dominant discourse in

Tribalism: the strangeness of postmodern social dynamics

of ``tribalism'' (Bauman, 1990; Maffesoli, 1996a).

(re)appropriated signs. Members of archaic tribes were related by

Tribal consumption: worth a second look

face-to-face or in large gatherings. It is the forgotten level in consumer research

micro-social cohort of individuals who share similar experiences and emotions,

Identifying the tribe: seeing the ordinary with fresh eyes

the tribe (or part of the tribe) gathers.

(3) a ``practitioner'' or adept who has quasi-daily involvement in tribal

Case study: marketing to the urban tribe of in-line roller-skaters

manufacturers and marketers with a number of opportunities to strengthen the

. Salomon is an embedded actor who shares the values of the tribe;

Tribal marketing and after: societing

market-oriented ethnography (Arnould and Wallendorf, 1994). These methods

commodity; it comes to be seen as part of the extended self. The return on

marketer's exciting task of identifying, supporting and integrating neo-tribes in

Maffesoli, M. (1996a), The Time of the Tribes, Sage, London.

Appendix 1. The Latin School of Societing

Appendix 2. The Lomo tribe

Lomography is a product of communication'', explains Gerald Matt, director of Vienna's

1. Chandra Sekhar Patro, Madhu Kishore Raghunath Kamakula. 183. [Crossref]

entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Research 92, 412-422. [Crossref]

European Journal of Marketing 45:11/12, 1768-1778. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 17:1, 144-149. [Crossref]

You might also like